0:00

We're driven by the search for better, but when it

0:03

comes to hiring, the best way to search for a

0:05

candidate isn't to search at all. Don't

0:07

search, match, with Indeed. Indeed

0:10

is your matching and hiring platform with

0:12

over 350 million global monthly

0:14

visitors according to Indeed data and a

0:17

matching engine that helps you find quality

0:19

candidates fast. Leveraging over 140 million

0:22

qualifications and preferences every day,

0:25

Indeed's matching engine is constantly

0:27

learning from your preferences. Join

0:29

more than 3.5 million businesses

0:32

worldwide that use Indeed to hire

0:34

great talent fast. And

0:36

listeners of this show will

0:38

get a $75 sponsored job

0:40

credit to get your jobs

0:43

more visibility at indeed.com/bluewire. Just

0:45

go to indeed.com/bluewire right now and

0:48

support our show by saying you

0:50

heard about Indeed on this podcast.

0:53

indeed.com/bluewire terms and conditions

0:56

apply. Need to hire? You

0:58

need Indeed. Huh. Watching

1:01

Kyle's unboxing videos again? Yeah, he

1:03

always finds the coolest... No

1:06

way, a robot dog! Gotta ask where he

1:08

got it. Or use your

1:10

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra. Just

1:13

draw a circle around the dog on your screen and it

1:15

shows you where to buy it right in the app. Oh,

1:17

I just learned a new trick. And that for once,

1:19

I beat Kyle to the next big thing. Circle

1:22

it. Get your Galaxy S24 Ultra

1:24

and circle the search with Google. Get yours

1:26

now at samsung.com. Internet connection required. Results may

1:28

vary based on visuals. We

1:31

are breaking down all aspects of Yankee

1:33

baseball. This is the Bronx Pinstripe Show

1:35

with your host, Andrew Rotondi and Scott

1:38

Ryan. Let's go.

1:47

What's up everybody? Welcome to the Bronx Pinstripe

1:49

Show. Scott, I want to get your take

1:51

on something because I feel like you're going

1:53

to have a strong opinion on this and

1:56

I did not prepare you. on

2:00

the NFC Championship game and the Lions decision

2:02

to go for it on fourth down multiple

2:05

times. And I was listening to

2:07

sports radio earlier this week as I was

2:09

driving Harrison to daycare and they were just

2:11

talking about how those

2:13

were pure analytical decisions by the Lions

2:15

front office. I guess they have one

2:18

of the biggest nerd teams in the NFL. And

2:20

it just got me thinking of all

2:22

of the hours we spent on this

2:25

podcast screaming about the Yankees analytics department

2:27

making decisions for on field things. Well,

2:29

if that's the case, then the Lions analytical department

2:31

just tends to go for fourth down every single

2:34

time because they know they went. That's what they

2:36

did. They went for the highest. It's also Dan

2:38

Campbell being Dan Campbell. I mean, the guy likes

2:40

to push it. My thoughts

2:42

are is if you're if you're going to if you're going to

2:44

kick the field goal and make it a three possession game in

2:46

the first half, you should probably do the same thing in the

2:48

second half when there's less time on the clock to

2:51

order and a half to go in the end of the

2:53

championship game. That's the big thing. So I think I think

2:55

a little bit of the moment

2:57

got to to

2:59

to coach Campbell and there

3:02

are a few other ones that the timeout at the

3:05

end of the game when they were holding their timeouts

3:07

was probably the most egregious decision of them all giving

3:09

their defense zero chance unless they had to they only

3:11

had to recover the onside kick. But yeah,

3:14

I was I was hoping man, I wanted the Lions

3:16

to win. I was running for the Lions too. That

3:18

would have been an awesome story for the city of

3:20

Detroit. And I have any rooting interest in any of

3:22

the teams left in in the at

3:25

that point left in the playoffs. But yeah, that would have

3:27

been fun. It just it just brought

3:29

back feelings of

3:32

Yankees making decisions in

3:34

postseason games. When you're like this is

3:37

a divisional series game or

3:39

a one game wildcard or a a

3:42

a a LCS and you're managing

3:44

it like it's a 162 game

3:46

season because analytics say to do something and

3:49

it just it got me angry again, even

3:51

though it was a football game. You

3:53

know, I think it's a little different. In the sense

3:55

that like there's such a moment

3:58

where in football. because of

4:00

the down and

4:02

distance and all that, it plays

4:04

differently into where in baseball, it's

4:06

so matchup dependent, one

4:09

on one matchup dependent, that it's

4:11

hard to equate them in the same

4:14

vein. You have to have a feel for both. And

4:17

yeah, I think Campbell went for a feel at

4:19

one point rather than going with the smart decision

4:21

of making it a three position game. But it's

4:25

good. As a Jets fan,

4:28

with my job being around

4:30

a whole bunch of football guys, it's

4:32

made me appreciate the entire league way

4:34

more, thank God, because being

4:36

a Jets fan is not fun. And

4:39

it makes you not like football. So

4:41

I can take my blinders off

4:43

a bit and just watch the

4:46

sport and listen to really smart

4:48

guys talk about the sport in

4:50

a way that is relatively, you

4:54

know, it's not skewed towards a team, it's completely

4:56

unbiased, but it comes from a player's perspective, which

4:58

is really interesting to me as a fan. It's

5:00

made me more of a football fan than,

5:03

you know, necessarily a Jets fan, which is the

5:05

lens I had been looking at it for a

5:07

long time, which is a much nicer, you know, existence

5:11

at that point, because you're just like, let's

5:13

see some good football, let's watch a good,

5:16

some good competition, rather than what's going

5:18

to happen next. And

5:21

it's easier to do that for football than it

5:23

is baseball. Baseball fans, you tend to be more

5:25

localized, you look at it through the lens of

5:27

your team, since you have to follow your team

5:30

very closely throughout the six month season and then

5:32

the playoffs. But as to segue

5:34

into our first topic, you know, decisions

5:36

like that remind me of, you know,

5:39

making a decision based on numbers, even

5:41

though like, you know, pulling a starting

5:43

pitcher who's dominating in a world series

5:45

game, even though it's the fifth inning, because

5:48

the numbers say to do that. Blake

5:50

Snell, who will start there with

5:52

the Yankees offer to him last last week,

5:54

we talked about a six year $150 million

5:58

offer, even though at the start of the and

6:00

he was asking for nine years and 270 million

6:02

dollars. So that's a

6:04

giant gap. There has been reports all

6:06

over the place this week that the

6:08

Yankees and him have stopped

6:10

talks. There's no negotiation, there's no middle ground. Other

6:12

talks have said, oh, maybe a shorter deal is

6:15

in play for him. It's just all

6:17

over the place. It is all over

6:19

the place. And I mean, obviously the speculation's running wild

6:22

because we're getting what were

6:24

two weeks away from- Two weeks away.

6:26

And there's massive free agents still out

6:28

there. Huge free agents happening still. So

6:30

I'm really interested to see how this

6:32

whole thing plays out and where guys

6:35

are gonna fall. And if these

6:37

longer term deals that we expected to happen

6:39

become shorter, actually that's not even true. The

6:43

longer term deals really are coming from the agent side

6:45

and that's like the propaganda sent out by

6:47

the representatives of the players. But I feel

6:50

like, as we've talked

6:52

about the remaining guys, like the

6:54

guys that we've remit, Bellinger, Snell,

6:58

Montgomery, maybe a little bit

7:01

less than, but these are shorter

7:03

to mid-term deals. And we're not talking

7:06

eight, nine year deals that should be warranted for

7:08

these types of players. I think we've been pretty

7:10

consistent in saying like, Snell

7:13

and Bellinger, you feel a

7:15

lot more comfortable if you're in that five year

7:18

range, whether it's plus or minus a year

7:20

and getting some crafty options in there to

7:22

make everybody feel good. But these eight, nine

7:24

year deals for the guys that are remaining,

7:27

maybe Jordan Montgomery could warrant that

7:29

just because of, I think

7:32

he's got some more juice left on. 32

7:34

years old too, right? Isn't he entering? I can't

7:36

believe he's 32. But he's entering his age 32

7:38

season. I think he'll be 32 this

7:40

season. Okay, well then yeah, that makes sense. But he's

7:42

always a guy that I think we were at like,

7:45

no matter, he just feels like a

7:47

five, six year guy just because of his talent level too.

7:50

Talent level and also, yes, he's had a really good

7:52

season and a half. But like

7:54

the track record is not there for Montgomery

7:57

as much as it is for Blake Snell.

7:59

Blake Snell. Two Cy Young

8:01

Awards. So he's in

8:03

more of a position to demand a nine-year

8:05

contract, even though I don't think he's worth

8:07

it, than Jordan Montgomery is. But like, Bellinger

8:09

is the interesting one because he's only 28

8:11

years old. Yeah, but

8:13

again, the wage dictates have played out

8:16

for him. No, age dictates, yeah,

8:19

longer term contract for him, but

8:21

he's not going to get nine years. And if

8:23

anything, a short deal for him, he can take

8:25

another chance like he did with the Cubs the

8:27

first time around, signing a short term deal. Play

8:31

well again for those short years and then

8:33

hit for agency again. Right now,

8:35

I pulled it. So there are still on the

8:37

market, Bellinger, Snow, Montgomery

8:39

and Chapman, those four names

8:41

all have projected war this coming season of

8:44

three and a half or better. Those are

8:46

all very high quality players still out there.

8:48

And we are two weeks away from pitchers

8:50

and catchers. Yeah, no, it's

8:53

crazy. Usually, you know, when you look at precedent,

8:55

these guys have signed by now and are, you

8:57

know, working with their perspective

9:00

teams in some regard and getting ready for,

9:02

you know, what reporting looks like.

9:04

So it's very surprising seeing them out there. But

9:06

I do think that the

9:08

Japanese players really threw off the

9:11

market and how, and I

9:13

think we're seeing the response from that because nobody wanted

9:15

to go after any of these guys until they were

9:17

done. And then, you know, the

9:19

asking price, I think, was just too much. And,

9:21

you know, maybe it's the agents looking at what

9:23

was happening and understanding that the price was really

9:25

high for, you know, for

9:28

the front end of the market. But

9:31

the back half of the market, as far as

9:33

time and the guys that are remaining, they're

9:36

not hitting the same value

9:39

prop as what we saw, you know,

9:42

the initial guys signed for. So

9:44

they're trying to go get it. Montgomery

9:47

turned 31 in December. So

9:49

he will pitch. This is his 31-year-old season.

9:51

So it's still, I don't think he's getting

9:53

that long-term deal. Yeah, I think

9:56

he's down-hold, honestly. The conversation... with

10:01

the MLB free agency, it's just, there

10:03

was the circus around Otani and

10:06

Yamamoto signing and that happened back

10:08

to back. And then it's basically

10:10

been crickets. Otherwise, I know we've

10:13

talked about this before, but like, would baseball

10:16

benefit from a signing window or

10:19

you get some sort of benefits, or if you

10:21

don't sign within that window, some sort of penalty

10:23

just to speed up this process, just to make

10:25

it a little bit more exciting of a baseball

10:28

off season, rather than having four free agents, not

10:30

to mention all the other guys that are above

10:32

three and a half war with,

10:35

it's about to be February 1st and they don't know what

10:37

spring training camp they're going to be reporting to. Yeah.

10:40

I mean, I think it does affect the game at some point,

10:42

right? Especially if you're not reporting on

10:44

time, the guys, guys get delayed

10:46

in some capacity, you know, depending

10:48

on when they actually do sign.

10:51

You and I agree on this one. I think that a

10:53

window, having, having a

10:55

window and an actual deadline for signing

10:57

these guys does

10:59

make some sense. I think it would be, it would

11:02

make things more interesting. It puts, it

11:04

puts a lot of interesting pressure on different

11:06

places, which I think would be entertaining for

11:08

everybody and probably drive the cost

11:10

up to be honest, but it would be a

11:12

fun game of chicken to watch knowing that there's

11:14

a deadline. I

11:17

don't know what would be better. I

11:20

would say giving teams benefits

11:23

for signing within that window would

11:25

be more incentive to get the

11:27

deals done than penalizing them for

11:29

not signing within that window. Do

11:31

you agree? Like maybe draft,

11:33

like a percentage

11:36

point off the luxury tax or something like

11:38

that. If, if, if say there's a three

11:40

week window from December 1st to December 20th,

11:43

right? Like that's your, that's the signing period

11:45

for MLB. And then if you, if, if

11:47

you sign a guy after that, like

11:49

you, you

11:51

don't get the benefit. I don't want to penalize

11:54

you more. Here's the, here's the, here's the, you

11:56

and your freaking tears. Yeah. What if you had

11:58

a tiered system where if you. If

12:00

you're at the top half of spending or

12:03

top half of luxury tax, you get

12:05

penalized. But if you're at the

12:07

lower half, you get incentivized for

12:09

going out and doing that. Or maybe it's-

12:11

Players wouldn't like that though, because- None

12:14

of this will go to the players. The players, I

12:16

think the CBA is the big problem here. Nobody

12:20

wants that window because they want the time

12:22

to negotiate. Wouldn't the Players Association want a

12:24

window though? Players don't like

12:26

the fact- I don't know, because they're not. If the guy's not

12:28

getting it- But I don't think the

12:30

Players Association likes that there's all these free agents and

12:32

it's February. Yeah,

12:35

I mean that's fair, but I think at the same time you could

12:37

look at the downside of it too from a player's side. If

12:40

you have to, you know, if the teams

12:42

have to negotiate within a window and then

12:44

they're getting to the end of that window,

12:46

and then they're getting penalized, well, maybe that's

12:48

taking dollars off- No, that's why I'm saying

12:50

incentivize them for signing in the window. Incentivize

12:52

the teams for getting deals done in the

12:54

window. Because you're saying don't penalize it all

12:56

after the window, only incentivize for before- Not

12:58

penalize, not penalize, but like it

13:00

just goes back to normal. You don't get

13:03

the incentive unless you sign within that window.

13:05

Yeah, all right. That's not bad. All

13:08

right, so the Blake Snell stuff, Bob Klapis wrote

13:10

an article that there was no middle ground for

13:12

the Yankees and Blake Snell. And he kind of

13:15

alluded to that the Yankees offer of six and

13:17

one fifty was just for show, and

13:20

that he theorized Steinbrenner has

13:22

budgeted roughly 25 to 28 million dollars, this

13:26

AAV, for another pitcher or another player,

13:28

but let's call it a pitcher, and

13:31

they just spent 18 and a

13:33

half on Strowman, that leaves roughly

13:35

10 million left over to get

13:38

another player. And Klapis, I

13:40

don't think he's just throwing shit against the wall.

13:42

I think he has inside sources. Right,

13:45

Cashman is his inside source. So

13:47

I think he's writing this from a place of- But

13:50

you're not going to get an impact starting pitcher for

13:52

anywhere remotely close to that. No, you're not. But

13:55

what I'm saying is Hector Nerris is the

13:57

guy that would fit that bill, fits that

13:59

money. They did not, uh, you

14:01

know, make a, make a competitive offer

14:04

apparently. Cause he signed for within that range.

14:06

Right. But what I'm saying is that the

14:09

Yankees would have taken Blake Snell

14:11

if he took their five, six year, $150 million deal,

14:13

which is 25 million AAV, but because they knew

14:17

that wasn't realistic, they just pivoted to getting

14:19

Strowman and then they have another $10 million

14:22

to work. But that doesn't mean

14:24

you're going to be signing Blake Snell or Jordan Montgomery

14:26

or bringing in a player that's going to be making

14:28

20 plus million AAV. He said Corbin

14:30

Burns would be a candidate to fit in there,

14:32

even though that would slightly put them over that

14:34

budget, just because it's only a one year commitment

14:37

of one more of arbitration. So I

14:39

assume this conversation is happening after Yamamoto

14:41

signed because that was not the case

14:44

with Yamamoto. Yamamoto being the exception. Uh,

14:46

and, and that's where, what was Yamamoto's

14:48

AAV? Yeah. I mean, Yamamoto's AAV was,

14:50

uh, in that range, right? It

14:54

was, it was, it was higher than 26 or

14:56

whatever you just said, whatever, whatever quote

14:58

budget was, you know, I don't remember

15:00

what his AAV was. It's not realistic

15:02

to, to, to, to put a number,

15:04

uh, like 25 on

15:06

a starting pitcher that is going to be an

15:09

impact guy, uh, towards the

15:11

top of the rotation. Obviously Yamamoto's, you

15:13

know, length and, and, uh, and contract

15:15

status would have, would have put him on the team for longer.

15:18

So, you know, maybe that changes the 27th, the math.

15:22

Okay. That was the offer or the sign.

15:25

That was his, that's his AAV with the Dodgers.

15:28

Including, uh, deferrals

15:31

and all that crap. Yeah.

15:33

I think it's the total AAV. It doesn't

15:35

include the posting payment.

15:38

Doesn't include the posting fee, but he

15:40

doesn't have any deferrals. He just has

15:42

a 12 year, three 25,

15:44

which, but there's incentives or opt outs in

15:46

there. Right. Isn't there an opt out in

15:49

the Yamamoto thing? Think, I don't

15:51

think there's an opt out. Oh no, there's an

15:53

opt out in the Imanga, uh, Imanaga deal. There

15:56

is an opt out in the, um, Yamamoto

15:59

contract. But it's only if the GM

16:01

would be right personal like it's it's oh

16:03

But also isn't if he has like Tommy

16:06

John or something doesn't something happen if he

16:08

has surgery He has options if

16:10

he has surgery, which is a strange thing His

16:12

his options in his contract are really odd and

16:14

they're after like the sixth or seventh year or

16:16

something No, I think they're even later than that

16:20

It has to do with him getting injured and

16:22

whether he wants to continue to

16:24

play baseball or not or something It's it's a

16:26

it's a strange contract By the

16:28

way, you're not in an impact I'm only I'm

16:30

talking about this because I know for a fact

16:33

Like I don't know for I don't know for

16:35

a fact But like I'm pretty confident

16:37

that Brian cash and Bob clapish are are he's

16:40

been wrong. This office. Okay He's

16:42

been wrong, but clapish and cashman are close.

16:44

Okay wrote that book about him a couple

16:46

years ago like he's not making

16:48

this up that The budget

16:50

of 25 to 30 million dollars

16:53

for another player was probably there

16:58

that's fine and you know again the the

17:00

fact that the Yankees set that budget

17:02

and then deterred from it because At

17:06

the end of the day the years for snow

17:08

was the big is the biggest issue They don't

17:10

want to put the years down and snow and

17:12

and his team are looking for a longer term

17:15

deal They're looking for more of that

17:17

commitment So he they're not getting nine years at this

17:19

point That's where the problem lies if that's what they're

17:21

actually going after that's where the problem lies It's not

17:23

as much in the AV I think the Yankees would

17:25

probably go higher on the AV if it was a

17:27

smaller contract a shorter contract Which

17:30

is there's been rumors of a three year

17:32

120 million dollar deal Which

17:34

would be 40 million a AV if

17:37

you're Blake Snell, I guess you could say

17:39

all right I'll take that and then hit

17:41

free agency again in three years and try

17:43

and get that deal again And then at

17:46

least I'm getting my money and get I'm gonna

17:48

get mine that way. Yeah term deals You

17:51

know that's more like a Dodgers

17:53

Trevor Bauer contract wasn't his that

17:55

worked out well He's

17:58

still on the market If he's

18:00

trying to come back in the league, if he's trying to

18:03

come back in Major League. Definitely. So

18:07

we'll see how that works out. I don't think he's gonna

18:09

get signed. Yeah. But

18:14

if they're looking at that number and then they're

18:16

trying to fill it with whatever

18:18

the body is, whether it's a starting pitcher

18:21

or a combination of the two, then

18:24

there are options for relievers at

18:26

that point, but

18:29

you're just, you have to determine if

18:31

that reliever is an impact guy, or like

18:33

we're seeing with Cashman going and

18:35

picking up guys off of waivers, can

18:38

they find someone on

18:40

a much cheaper budget and

18:42

get a similar production from

18:45

said player? And again, we've said this at

18:47

Nozium, that's the one area that Cashman has

18:49

had a lot of success. You

18:52

mentioned Hector Nares signed a one year, $9 million deal

18:54

with the Cubs, and then there's a club option in

18:56

2025. The total possible

18:58

value of the deal is 23.25 million. Nares

19:02

was linked to the Yankees. He's

19:05

off the market now, obviously. The Yankees seemingly

19:07

have been trying to get more

19:09

left-handed pitchers on the 40-man roster.

19:12

They claimed Matt Gage off waivers

19:14

from Houston. They ended up

19:16

designating Diego Castillo for assignment, who they had just

19:19

picked up off of waivers. Gage is

19:21

30 years old, 16 Major League

19:23

appearances to a 183 ERA, obviously

19:26

limited time. He does have a minor league

19:28

option remaining though. And so now on the

19:30

40-man roster, they have Victor Gonzalez, Matt Crook,

19:32

Nick Ramirez, and Matt Gage, all left-handed pitchers.

19:36

We've said this every episode for the past two

19:38

months. Juan de Peralta's still there. If

19:41

you want to add a lefty to the bullpen, that

19:43

option is still there. I

19:46

mean, they're gonna do hunger games for

19:49

lefty relievers and see what happens in spring training.

19:52

So you look at Gage's numbers, actually they

19:55

were better than I was expecting to see

19:57

like- 16 Major League appearances. I understand that.

20:00

But they were pretty good, 16 appearances. Yeah,

20:03

I would rather have a 183 over 16 appearances than

20:06

an 813, but it's still 16 appearances. Okay,

20:09

well, it's a reliever. You know, their appearances

20:11

aren't as high and give the guy more

20:13

opportunity and maybe you see more of the

20:16

same. I don't know. 16

20:18

is not nothing either. But you have,

20:20

and they obviously see something there. And again,

20:22

I do think they're gonna throw some, these

20:25

guys out for competition and see what happens. And maybe

20:27

they don't believe that they can, that

20:30

they need to go out and sign a Juan De Peralta

20:32

for another $10 million or

20:34

whatever, eight to $10 million, whatever he's gonna get.

20:37

Maybe not. And they could do it in-house

20:39

with what they're looking for on the waiver

20:42

wire. Do

20:46

you think their plan is to still add another pitcher,

20:48

be it starter or reliever? I

20:50

think that they should. I'm not talking about someone you

20:52

claim off waivers or someone competing for the roster. I'm

20:54

saying someone you sign or trade for that is gonna

20:56

be on the 26-man roster. Look,

20:58

I've been consistent with this saying that they still need

21:00

another guy. I still think that this is an opportunity

21:02

for them to be able to create that. Nothing what

21:04

they need. Do you think they're gonna still add another?

21:06

I think that they will. I

21:09

think he's gonna be opportunistic. If there's a deal coming

21:11

around, if some of these guys that haven't signed all

21:13

of a sudden become a value and they're looking for

21:15

a, they flip the script

21:17

and they want a, or they'd be amenable

21:19

to a shorter term deal with

21:21

a higher AAV but

21:23

less control of

21:27

a long-term contract and less dependency on paying

21:29

them for five to six years, then yeah,

21:31

I could see it happening. They

21:34

need it. What point does that happen though? Because

21:36

pitchers and catchers report Valentine's Day. That's

21:38

two weeks from now. So

21:42

that deal has to get done between

21:44

now and then for the pitcher to be in

21:46

camp when all the other pitchers are coming to

21:48

camp. Yeah, but I think pitchers

21:51

can probably take another couple of weeks to figure it

21:53

out. They're still throwing on their, on

21:55

the side. And I

21:57

don't think it's an imperative thing that a

21:59

pitcher is- in camp at the

22:01

exact time. If it's a guy

22:03

that you know has a proven

22:06

track record and will contribute significantly

22:09

to this team, if he's a veteran guy, he's going to get

22:11

ready. You believe that,

22:13

right? So I don't

22:15

think that that time frame, I think the market's going to

22:17

dictate when one of these guys start signing, they're

22:20

going to fall like dominoes when one of them

22:22

signs. When Snell goes or Montgomery goes, I think

22:24

the other one does. That's what we said about

22:26

Wonso Tani and Yamamoto signing. Yeah, but this is

22:28

the next tier. This is that next tier now.

22:31

Now they've separated themselves. Now we're waiting for one

22:33

of these guys to sign. Now scratch all that

22:35

we've seen, put these guys in

22:37

a new bucket because now these guys are in

22:39

a bucket together. The late guys, the guys that

22:41

haven't signed with two weeks left to

22:44

go that are potentially looking

22:46

for longer term deals that are not going to get

22:48

longer term deals. This is a new class of free

22:52

agents. I could see Blake

22:54

Snell signing a short term deal because I also think Boris

22:56

would push him to do that. I think Jordan Montgomery is

22:58

still going to end up signing for five years. I

23:01

think Montgomery makes sense for a bunch of teams for

23:04

five to six years. So

23:07

I wouldn't even surprise if he would get a little bit longer than

23:09

that. But I think that he's the guy that makes a ton of

23:11

sense for that. Five to six years. And

23:13

I think I still think that there's probably a

23:15

number of teams in on Jordan Montgomery for five

23:17

to six years. We're

23:20

driven by the search for better. But when it comes

23:22

to hiring, the best way to search for a candidate

23:24

isn't to search at all. Don't

23:27

search match with Indeed. Indeed

23:29

is your matching and hiring platform with

23:31

over 350 million global monthly

23:34

visitors, according to Indeed data and a

23:36

matching engine that helps you find quality

23:38

candidates fast. Leveraging over 140

23:42

million qualifications and preferences every

23:44

day. Indeed's matching engine is

23:46

constantly learning from your preferences.

23:49

Join more than 3.5 million businesses

23:51

worldwide that use Indeed to hire great

23:53

talent fast and listeners of this show

23:55

will get a $75 sponsored job

23:59

credit to get your jobs more

24:01

visibility at indeed.com/BlueWire. Just go

24:03

to indeed.com/BlueWire right now and

24:06

support our show by saying

24:08

you heard about Indeed on

24:10

this podcast. indeed.com/BlueWire

24:13

terms and conditions apply.

24:15

Need to hire? You

24:17

need Indeed. Another

24:20

thing that caught my eye this week,

24:22

Mark Feinstein wrote another exec who predicted

24:25

a Blake Snell San Francisco Giants match

24:27

also pegged the Yankees as the team

24:29

to sign Bellinger who could see time

24:32

at first base center field in DH in 2024 then potentially

24:35

take over at first base in 2025 as

24:37

the Yankees decline Anthony Rizzo's club

24:39

option at the end of this season. Like

24:41

literally exactly what Logan and I had said

24:43

in our plans. There's a quote in here.

24:45

I don't know if those are the exact

24:47

moves, the exec said, but I think both

24:49

of those clubs have money to spend and need

24:52

to do something to make a splash. Feinstein

24:54

is not someone to just like stir the

24:56

pot. So he's writing this for a reason.

24:58

I don't know if the Yankees are kicking

25:00

the tires on Cody Bellinger at this point.

25:02

That would surprise me quite a bit, but

25:05

I thought it's interesting. But

25:07

I still, I think that Cashman at this

25:09

point with this, with these guys that are

25:11

not signed is staying close to what the

25:13

situation is. And if, if

25:16

that value prop, and I think that's where

25:18

it, I think it's more about the value

25:20

prop rather than the budget per year on

25:22

the AAV side, I think if they could

25:24

find, and they see a significant value prop

25:26

for, you know, a, whatever

25:29

the number, whether it's war

25:31

or another metric that they're looking at for,

25:33

for contributing this year, that,

25:35

that he could pounce. I

25:37

think that is a, I think if

25:40

it were, if I were to take

25:42

a complete guess here, I would say

25:44

that Steinbrenner has given some authority for

25:46

if, if this happens,

25:48

then we can do this. It's a, if

25:50

this, then that scenario. And

25:52

they're waiting almost for, for guys to

25:55

come back to them rather than being

25:57

aggressive. I still think it's

25:59

a long That's a bad place to be.

26:02

Well, no, because I think that they believe that they're

26:04

in a good spot now. That's the mentality. The mentality

26:06

is that they believe that they're in a good spot

26:08

now, but if something of value comes

26:10

to them, then they will consider it. That's

26:14

what I think. It's like, you know, you set

26:16

your mark on a particular value

26:18

prop, whatever that metric is for them, you

26:20

know, money and war. That's

26:23

like preferring to draft in the NFL draft, second

26:25

or third, so you don't have to make the

26:27

pressure of making the first pick. But

26:30

no, you should want the first pick so you

26:32

can make the decision. You're the Yankees. You have

26:34

the money and go pay whoever you want to

26:36

pay if you feel they're going to make your

26:38

team better. I know they wanted Yamamoto and he

26:40

didn't want to sign with them. Okay.

26:43

Is the next option? Let's just see what falls to us.

26:46

I hate that. I hate that as a

26:48

plan B because that's exactly the plan B

26:50

that happened back in the 2018, 2019

26:54

off season when what's his

26:56

name? Didn't sign with them. Otani didn't sign

26:59

with them. Their plan B was let's be

27:01

opportunistic instead of let's just go get the talent.

27:03

This is not a plan B at the first level

27:06

of your choices though.

27:08

They got Soto for

27:11

this coming year. They have Redone coming back. They

27:13

believe that that's the case. And I know we're

27:15

going to talk about Vegas and what the odds

27:17

are for the wind totals,

27:19

but apparently Vegas does feel the same way. Vegas

27:21

and the front office of the New York Yankees

27:24

feel the same way in the better. They're betting

27:26

on the Yankees. And I think that's the star

27:28

power factor. I think that's not that they got

27:30

their star power across the league. You're telling me

27:32

Houston doesn't have a star power Houston

27:35

and you're looking. I just pulled division

27:37

odds. I understand that, but they are

27:39

their star power. The

27:42

Boojays have star power. The, the,

27:44

the Orioles have young star power.

27:46

Like there's, there's some, there's some

27:49

interesting, interesting lines being drawn for

27:51

one. Soto is the second biggest

27:53

name of the off season to go to a

27:55

new team. Oh, Tony's number one. Juan Soto's number

27:58

two. Do you want to call

28:00

Yamamoto three? fine, but like that's an international

28:02

signing. And the Yankee sign is the game

28:04

on the market. And it's the Yankees. Okay.

28:06

So that's why. So your contingent plan that

28:08

you're talking about is on the third and

28:10

fourth pitcher that they believe will be helping

28:13

the team. It's not the first

28:15

guy. It's not the second guy. We're

28:18

down the totem pole at this point. So saying

28:20

that this is a plan B, I don't think

28:22

that's accurate. I think they believe that they're in

28:24

a good spot with where they are. And if

28:26

another piece falls to them that they think could

28:28

put them over the edge in some capacity based

28:30

on their metric. And again, when I'm saying that

28:32

something has to follow on, I think it's less

28:35

about the money, but more about the years and

28:37

the commitment to that player and not being, you

28:40

know, put in a position where you got to pay a guy

28:43

that you're not a hundred percent about for

28:45

your three, four, five, six, seven, rather

28:48

than them coming to a shorter term deal with a

28:50

little bit more money. So that's where I think if

28:53

my gut, if I were to, you

28:55

know, make a, make a prediction on what they

28:58

were thinking, I think that it's more about the

29:00

value proper and the years rather than the AAV.

29:03

So the sports books I pulled, um,

29:05

I pulled from draft Kings, fan dual,

29:08

bed, MGM, and Caesars and

29:10

the wind totals. So the Yankees are projected to

29:12

not only have the most wins in the AOES,

29:14

but also the American league at a

29:16

93 or 93 and a half. That is an 11 or an

29:20

11 and a half increase year over year. That

29:22

is a big jump. Now, obviously we agree that

29:25

the Yankees are going to be better. Are they

29:27

going to be 11 wins better? I'm not

29:29

convinced of that yet. Then

29:31

next in the division, they have the Orioles at

29:33

like 87, 88, uh, the Blue Jays

29:38

at the same range, 87, 88, the Rays at 84

29:40

and a half. And then the, the Red Sox pulling up

29:45

the rear at 80 79, 80. So year over

29:48

year, that is 13 fewer wins for Baltimore, 14

29:50

to 15

29:55

fewer wins for Tampa, two to two and

29:57

a half fewer wins for Toronto, 11 more wins. for

30:00

the Yankees and you know

30:02

flat to a couple wins more for

30:04

Boston. Those are big swings. I

30:07

don't understand the Baltimore number. I

30:09

don't understand the Baltimore or the Tampa number.

30:14

The Tampa number is I mean it's a significant

30:16

number and you know it's not like. Tampa is

30:18

gonna win more than 84 games this year. It's

30:21

not like the the shortstop that that will

30:24

no longer be named is worth 14 games.

30:27

He doesn't have a 14 game swing if

30:29

you're looking at what what happened down

30:32

there and they're not that different of a team

30:34

outside of you know a couple

30:36

other moves and they got off to a super

30:38

hot start last year. Didn't they get off

30:40

to like a 13-1 start or something crazy last year

30:42

so that may be inflated their win total a bit

30:45

but I still think they are

30:47

at the very least in the high

30:50

80s. Yeah

30:52

the the oral one is the is

30:55

the biggest. They would go from 101 last year

30:57

down to 87. What who

31:00

and what in

31:02

the world makes you believe that they're gonna be

31:04

worse? Is it just the head-to-head with the Yankees?

31:06

Also the the the Dodgers are the only team

31:08

I think that have I forget what the number

31:11

is. I think it was a hundred or a

31:13

hundred and one as the over-under for the Dodgers

31:15

and like that's rare to have an over-under at

31:17

a hundred. Usually the over-under win totals are in

31:19

the at the most the mid

31:22

90s. So the Yankees being

31:24

at 93 the Astros being at

31:26

92 and a half makes

31:29

sense from that standpoint. So I would understand if they

31:31

put Baltimore even at like 91 or 92 and a

31:33

half but to go

31:36

from 101 down to 87 seems

31:38

like a drastic decline

31:40

for a team that has not

31:42

lost anyone and is presumably going

31:44

to be better this year

31:46

from a talent perspective just having another year

31:48

in the league. Yeah and

31:51

they're gonna get you know more high highly

31:53

touted young guys coming up to contribute at

31:55

some point. Oh and by the

31:57

way I wonder that when did you pull these was

31:59

it before after the Andalus family. It

32:01

was yesterday morning. It was

32:03

Tuesday morning. I pulled these numbers. So I wonder

32:06

how they've swung since the news

32:08

that the Orioles are being sold. Yeah.

32:11

So I don't know how much that affects. Again,

32:13

there are still guys on this, like

32:15

we just talked about, free agent market that

32:17

could absolutely help the Baltimore Orioles probably more

32:19

than any other team because of the Utes

32:22

that they got on that team. They

32:28

still end up finding a short term deal with

32:30

Baltimore. That's a problem. That's a

32:32

problem. Maybe not. Yeah, that's a problem.

32:35

We've got the holiday kid

32:37

that seemingly looks like a

32:39

freaking insane talent that's

32:43

going to be playing in Baltimore

32:45

for the majority of the year too, most likely.

32:48

So they're on a trajectory that's going

32:50

up. And I understand you can't win

32:52

100 plus games

32:54

every single year. It's a lot to ask, but the

32:57

swing is, doesn't make sense to me. And

32:59

I'm wondering why this is Vegas. Vegas is

33:01

not usually this far off. This is a

33:03

major swing from, for

33:05

even you look at the gap between the rest

33:08

of the teams in the ALE with the Yankees.

33:11

That tells me that they believe the Yankees

33:13

are five games better than the Orioles go.

33:15

I do not. And that's, that's why, that's

33:18

why that if Vegas

33:20

believes, I think Vegas and Brian Cashman

33:22

and the house time runner are on

33:24

the same page, they believe that the

33:26

injuries were a significant factor and that

33:28

these injuries are not going to happen

33:30

again. And if you look at

33:33

that, that total, that's exactly what

33:35

it says to me because, and I know

33:37

Juan Soto makes a few games in here,

33:39

but the fact that the, no, Juan Soto

33:41

is Juan Soto is the biggest

33:44

difference to the Yankees off season. Obviously they

33:46

got Verdugo as well and they're getting guys

33:48

back. Guys had bad years last year. The

33:51

combination of the fact that they had talent

33:53

on the roster already and that they did

33:56

get injured. I think Vegas

33:58

believes that the injury. Can you guys pull? If

34:00

you could find it, the going into 2023,

34:02

what the Yankees over under was. I'm

34:05

curious what that number was. If

34:07

it was right around 92 93. Because if it, if it was in

34:11

the low nineties, then that makes

34:14

sense because they thought last year's team was

34:16

say a 91 win team. You add one

34:18

Soto to that same team, which is basically

34:20

what you're doing 93 and a

34:22

half for 2023. So it's the same. So

34:27

you're saying going at it. But again, you have to look

34:30

you have to look at the teams around you

34:32

also, but yeah, Baltimore wasn't expected to win a

34:34

hundred games last year. I get all that. Yeah.

34:37

This article has like five

34:40

different betting sites and they all were 93

34:42

and a half, except who one of them

34:44

was 93. Yeah. I

34:47

know that teams around you are going to obviously

34:49

factor in because you're playing. That's where you have

34:51

to be in order to get those win total,

34:53

which is even more of a reason. Like the

34:55

ale East is so competitive. Other than the Red

34:57

Sox, who are dumpster fire, every other team in

34:59

the division is competitive. Yeah.

35:04

You're not playing as many games against them. That's the

35:06

difference between. Don't play in most of your games against

35:08

them. Still playing a lot of games against them. So

35:12

yeah. And the, the, the, the NL West

35:15

is, uh, it's coming into town. So there's,

35:17

you know, if you look at the, the NL

35:20

West is, is, is, is a, between obviously the

35:22

reigning champs and the Astros and the Mariners, like

35:24

that's not an easy division to play.

35:26

Those are three tough teams. So strength of schedule.

35:28

I mean, if you look at strength of schedule

35:31

compared to, uh, some of the other teams in

35:33

the American league, they're, I'm curious as to where

35:35

that, that lies. It's still the, the over under

35:37

for the Yankees, given what they did last year,

35:39

just screams that Vegas

35:42

believes they were a little unlucky and

35:44

they added the best offensive player available.

35:47

Yes. And I have some other fan grass

35:50

projections that I want to get to, to

35:52

relate to that. But before we do that

35:54

factor is here to help you eat healthy

35:56

in 2024. There are a million reasons that

35:58

eating healthy is difficult. busy schedule, work, kids,

36:00

no time to go to the grocery store, no

36:03

time to cook, or you might just have some

36:05

food cravings. With Factor, you don't have to worry

36:07

about any of those because they deliver ready to

36:09

eat meals to you every single week. The process

36:11

is super easy. You go on their website and

36:13

choose from over 35 delicious meals each week. Highly

36:16

skilled chefs prepare the meals. The food gets delivered

36:18

to you. It is always fresh and never frozen. You

36:20

can store it in your refrigerator and then when you're

36:22

ready to eat it, you pop them in the

36:24

microwave for two minutes and then you enjoy. There

36:27

are options for keto, calorie smart, vegan,

36:29

veggie, and much more. They have over

36:31

55 add-ons, juices, smoothies, snacks, so you never

36:33

get tired of what you're eating. The

36:36

subscription options are also flexible. You can change your

36:38

delivery order every week with plans from four to

36:40

18 meals or you can pause or reschedule whenever

36:42

you want if you're going to be on vacation

36:44

or something like that. I said

36:46

this last time, but the chorizo chili that they sent

36:48

me was my favorite, so much so that I ordered

36:51

more of it because it was delicious. Factor

36:53

is no prep, no mess, just

36:55

delicious food. Head to factormeals.com/Bronx50 and

36:57

use code Bronx50 to get 50%

36:59

off. It's

37:02

half off of

37:05

your order at

37:08

factormeals.com/B-R-O-N-X-5-0. factormeals.com/Bronx50.

37:14

Got your own bathroom down there in the

37:16

basement? For

37:18

the chorizo chili. No, I don't. I got

37:20

to go upstairs. Oh man, that's a tough walk. Funny. So,

37:29

I want to ask, these are a couple

37:31

of fan graphs projections that I pulled and

37:34

that I just never got to last week. I

37:36

want to ask you gut check. Would

37:39

you be okay or disappointed if the

37:41

player had this season? Yeah. Anthony

37:44

Volpe, 228 batting average, 307 on base, 409 slugging, a 98 WRC

37:46

plus, 2.7 war produced,

37:50

20 home runs, 70 runs, and 143 games. I

37:56

would expect better numbers. So, you'd be a little

37:58

disappointed. Yeah, and there's a

38:01

caveat to this, I think. The

38:03

20 home runs, I don't care as much about it.

38:05

What you did last year. I understand that. I

38:08

would rather him take away from some

38:10

production and increase the

38:12

plate discipline, bat the ball, get on base,

38:15

just be

38:17

more of a guy that gets

38:19

on base and can cause- He's gonna be hitting

38:21

ninth. He's probably gonna be hitting ninth in this

38:24

order. I don't need him to hit 20 home runs.

38:26

I need him to get on base more than 307. I

38:29

think if you were to hit 15 home runs and

38:32

increase that OBP- And

38:35

batting average, he needs more hits than he needs

38:37

to get on base. If you increase that OBP,

38:39

I think his batting average is gonna go up

38:42

because I think the OBP is directly affected by

38:44

strikeouts. I think that's a big piece

38:46

of this. And if he can cut

38:48

down his K rate, then I think that all

38:50

will take care of itself and you'll see those

38:52

numbers. And maybe the home runs just stay where

38:54

they are because that's what he is. But I

38:58

would expect the on-base percentage to be higher than

39:00

that for sure. And that batting average to be

39:02

higher than that. I think he's definitely closer. We

39:04

talked about this last year. I think- You

39:06

know, he- He's a 260

39:08

hitter, maybe even better

39:11

than that as he improves as a baseball- God, I

39:13

hope he turns into better than a 260 hitter. In

39:15

year two- I know 300 hitters don't exist anymore.

39:18

But he needs, if

39:21

he's gonna be a shortstop for the Yankees for

39:23

the foreseeable future, he needs to hit higher than

39:25

260. Yeah,

39:28

no, I get it. I think you look at Glaber's

39:30

numbers and you

39:32

probably put Volpe a little

39:34

higher on the on-base percentage, a little lower on

39:36

the production, but not that far off. So

39:39

Glaber's numbers projected this year, 270, 342, 457, a 122

39:41

WRC plus, 3.9

39:46

war, 25 homers, 85 runs, and 149 games. This

39:51

is almost identical to 2023. It's

39:53

like the numbers are off by margins. And

39:56

you look at the difference between them, the

39:58

projection for a 340- two and

40:01

a 307 on base

40:03

percentage. That's a significant difference. You

40:05

know, and I, well, look at the batting average

40:08

difference in the flow. I know, but I, I

40:10

expect, I expect Volpe used to be much closer

40:12

to what they're projecting for Glaber. Um, but

40:14

again, this is, you know, is that, is that

40:16

in your number two of the player or is that

40:19

closer to where I probably expect him to be career

40:21

wise? Like I, I think career wise, once he hits

40:23

his stride, he could, I don't think he's going to

40:25

be a 300 guy, I think he's probably going to be closer to like 280.

40:28

Um, but I think he needs to live around the

40:30

new 300. Yeah. He's on OBP.

40:34

Like I think he should be at a,

40:36

at 350. I think that's where he should

40:38

be. If his batting average goes up 40, 30

40:41

points, his own base percentage goes up 30 points. Yeah.

40:43

Well, they're going to correlate for sure. Cause a

40:46

307 on base for 228 batting

40:48

average isn't horrible. Like that's

40:50

actually like, you know, what's that? Uh,

40:53

77, 79 points higher. Like

40:56

that's not bad. That's pretty good on

40:58

his strikeouts. And I think that comes with time

41:01

and plate discipline and, and being in the league

41:03

and, and understanding, you know, the pitchers that you're

41:05

going up against and just, just again, more time,

41:07

just more time at more plates, more plate appearances,

41:09

more, uh, more time with the guys, more, more,

41:12

more feel all of that. Like he's going to

41:14

get better instinctually. I think he's a very good

41:16

player and I think he will improve. So I

41:18

think he's going to, I think he's going to

41:21

do better than these numbers. But would

41:23

you be good with clavorous numbers? Because I obviously

41:25

would. I'll take that. Yeah.

41:28

I think glabrous numbers are pretty, pretty

41:30

damn close. I think he's going to have more

41:32

home runs. Um, but I think he, I think

41:34

25 home runs is pretty good. Yeah.

41:37

I think that, uh, I could see him hitting 30,

41:39

but again, when we know when he's

41:41

going, right, he's using the full field, he's, he's

41:43

hitting a lot more line drives, there's

41:46

going to be a lot of those line drives that are going out.

41:48

I would be happy with those numbers. Yep. Aligned

41:51

DJ LeMahieu, two 57, three 41, three 90,

41:53

one Oh three. WRC

41:55

plus 15 home runs, 80 runs, 136 games. Yeah.

42:00

The batting average and the on-base percentage

42:02

to me are the correlation is a

42:04

little off. I would expect if

42:07

he's hitting 260, I think that we're

42:09

in a down year. I think

42:11

DJ LeMahieu needs to be when

42:14

he's right. And this is not saying I value

42:17

batting average more than other, but when

42:19

he's right, his batting average, he has

42:21

a high batting average. That's

42:24

just a player he is. So I would expect

42:26

that number to be up and correlate.

42:29

What is career on-base

42:31

percentage, guys? If you look that one up, I'm curious as to where

42:33

that is. Yeah, maybe

42:35

basically what this is saying so far

42:37

is Anthony Volpe is slightly worse than

42:39

league average offensive player. Glaver Torres is

42:41

significantly better, 22% better. DJ

42:44

LeMahieu is barely above league average at 103. So

42:48

far, if we're having DJ

42:50

and Volpe in the lineup call

42:53

it league average, I want better from

42:56

those starting players than league average.

42:59

Especially if DJ's going to be your primary lead-off hitter. Yeah,

43:02

lead-off hitter. And DJ's career is 354 on-base percentage.

43:07

Yeah, not too far up, but

43:10

that's for the season. I

43:12

expect him to be closer to that for

43:14

sure. I think because of that, that batting

43:16

average will be higher than what they're projecting.

43:19

Anthony Rizzo, 243, 335, 437 slugging, 115 WRC plus, 24 home runs, 72 runs, and 128 games.

43:28

So obviously there's some games missed in there that they're

43:30

maybe factoring an injury. I think this is also just

43:33

based on recent history.

43:36

But what we saw from Rizzo before

43:38

his concussion last year was much better

43:40

than what this is saying. So

43:43

for a full year of Anthony Rizzo, he's going

43:45

to be hitting probably fourth. It

43:49

seems like they're going to go DJ Soto,

43:51

judge Rizzo. To

43:55

me, that's not good enough from Rizzo as a

43:57

cleanup hitter. No, I think those numbers are good

43:59

enough. I think

44:02

he's coming into the season healthy, as

44:08

everybody is thinking. Hopefully all

44:11

the symptoms from the concussion

44:14

are past him and everything we've heard is

44:17

good from anybody

44:19

who's talked about Anthony Rizzo and the way he's feeling.

44:22

So I would expect definitely better numbers than that, no

44:24

doubt. Especially when you have

44:26

the lineup significantly improving with a guy

44:28

like Juan Soto being plugged in there.

44:31

There's gonna be more opportunity, there's gonna be, people are

44:33

gonna be coming at you, I think he's gonna have

44:35

a better season than that. But clearly

44:37

health is a huge factor here. Stanton,

44:40

231-313-472, 114 WRC plus 26 home runs, 57

44:46

runs in 105 games played. I

44:51

mean, I don't know, man. You're sure. So

44:53

the reason I pulled these five guys is

44:56

because you've got these five players,

44:59

you've got Soto and Judge who in my opinion

45:01

is the centerpiece of the lineup. Those are the

45:04

short things, they're gonna be hitting. And

45:06

then you plug and play the other two, I guess

45:08

I probably should have pulled Verdugo. I

45:10

didn't though. And then

45:12

whoever's catching is kept. But my point

45:15

is, we

45:17

basically said only glabortoras of these

45:19

projections are good, the rest need

45:22

to be better than this. So

45:24

then if the other five guys, other

45:26

than Soto and Judge that we're relying

45:29

on, we're saying their projections are

45:31

not good enough, why are we then seeing

45:33

the Yankees as the most wins in the

45:35

American League? Offense

45:38

was the problem last year, despite

45:41

all the other crap that happened to this team.

45:45

One Soto is not worth 11 and

45:47

a half games, as you said. One Soto,

45:49

obviously- How many Aaron Judge through a full

45:51

season and not missing time and not coming

45:53

back and trying to battle through the second

45:56

half with a toe injury. I'm not sitting

45:58

here trying to tell you the- Yankees should

46:00

be at an 84 and a

46:02

half over under win total. I'm just trying

46:04

to figure out how the Yankees, with

46:07

the current state of the roster, until

46:09

we see improvement from

46:11

the rest of those guys this season,

46:13

I don't see how they're winning the

46:16

division. Like in a runaway is basically

46:18

what this is saying. But you're just

46:20

saying I need to see it for

46:22

them to believe that these guys are

46:24

all projecting and going after what they

46:27

believe will happen. And you

46:29

can't expect Judge to miss the time that he

46:31

did. That was a fluke injury.

46:33

I'm not. Even if Toto

46:35

and Judge are healthy all year and producing at

46:37

the MVP level, which they would say should. Well,

46:39

you can say the same thing about Rizzo. Fluke

46:41

injury in the sense that, you know, and you

46:44

have to either believe that he's good and that's

46:46

past him, because if it is and you believe

46:48

that, then you know, you can put that on.

46:51

What are these sportsbook using to make

46:54

these over under win totals? They're obviously taking, I'm

46:56

not saying they're using fan graphs, but they're taking

46:58

into account projections for players. Yeah, for sure. They

47:01

are. And if the projections for these players are what

47:03

I just read to you, despite

47:06

the fact that you have a healthy Judge all

47:08

year and one Soto in the lineup, that doesn't

47:10

instantly turn this lineup into a top five lineup.

47:13

It takes it from a bottom five lineup to

47:15

a middle of the pack lineup. Is

47:18

middle of the pack lineup enough to win the division

47:20

by five games? I mean,

47:22

like you said, the numbers that we didn't pull on here,

47:24

like Verdugo is not in there. And if you expect Verdugo

47:26

to be a- I'll

47:28

pull up Verdugo right now. Just think about the guys that

47:30

were trotting out in the outfield last year. Think about that.

47:32

And then- Yeah, that's a

47:34

dumpster fire. Also, Jason Dominguez, you know, coming

47:37

back mid season and having a hot air.

47:39

How do you factor? I mean, come on.

47:42

If you look at him and you compare him to one of

47:45

the replacement players that the Yankees had put out in the second

47:47

half of the year, you can do that. You

47:49

can start going levels deeper. Here

47:51

is Verdugo's projection. And I also think Carlos

47:53

Rodone's a big piece of that. 267,

47:56

327, 417, a 107. WRC

48:00

plus with 13 home runs for

48:03

Alex for vertigo projected That's

48:05

nothing special He doesn't

48:07

need to be that special. He's a turn the lineup over towards

48:10

where he's gonna be Yeah,

48:14

my only point is that Some

48:17

of these how about these can I frame it

48:19

this way bigger than the rest of the guy

48:23

of The guys the five guys we

48:25

reviewed plus for do go Call

48:28

it three of those five need to have

48:30

better than projection season if the Yankees are

48:32

gonna win a division Yeah,

48:36

that's fine That's

48:38

my point Well, then they need

48:40

to do that Yeah, they need these

48:43

are these are tough projections honestly for these guys because

48:45

of the injury factor from last year And I think

48:47

Vegas is is is seeing that Okay.

48:50

Well, I like I like that. It's always it's

48:52

always a safe bet when you bet on an

48:54

injury player to stay stay healthy It's

48:56

when you look at the type of injuries and

48:59

again the injury players you're looking at from last

49:01

year Stay on

49:03

the night though. I'm not in that

49:05

pack Rizzo was a fluke concussion injury.

49:07

So I judge I Judge

49:10

was a fluke injury and then and then Bodo who

49:12

is not an injury guy. There you go but

49:15

judge is judges I'm

49:18

not calling him an injury guy because not prior

49:20

to last year that he's not stayed healthy. Yes

49:23

Stanton is is I have no confidence in him

49:25

staying healthy DJ LeMahieu Do you have confidence like

49:27

what what are we gonna get from I have

49:29

no clue is DJ LeMahieu going to

49:31

be we pulled his numbers? So this

49:33

goes into the segment areas of improvement for

49:35

those key players that we just reviewed Let's start

49:38

with DJ LeMahieu who we pulled his numbers

49:40

right before the start of this pot. He

49:42

had a strong August that's it

49:44

last year and we Constantly

49:47

kept saying our second half was better second

49:49

half was better Yeah, his second half was

49:51

better because he had a really strong August

49:53

his July was pretty mediocre overall his September

49:55

was mediocre overall And we know how bad

49:57

he was from April through June

50:00

So what is DJ LeMahieu gonna be? We

50:03

need to see him improve and one

50:05

key area He needs to improve on

50:07

something. He was so frickin good on

50:09

for the Yankees up until recently clutch

50:12

stats runners in scoring position last year 224

50:15

batting average 296 slugging 629

50:19

OPS Runner

50:22

on second base. He was up 35 times.

50:24

He had a 143 batting average with a

50:26

457 OPS 12

50:28

really had a character 12 appearances with the

50:30

bases loaded. He had a 334 OPS He

50:33

was a complete no show with runners on

50:35

base last year Which is why he was

50:37

so good for the Yankees in his first

50:39

two plus seasons Yeah,

50:42

and and you know the the biggest thing that

50:44

we can have that we can look at for

50:46

him and and it's it's the The

50:49

hardest thing to determine with him is is

50:51

obviously the injury History

50:53

and and what what's happening with the lower half

50:57

Specifically the feet for him and toes But

51:00

he's not getting younger. So this is a guy that's

51:02

not the most athletic guy in the world Not

51:05

the most fleet of foot in the first place and

51:07

now you get hampered There's

51:10

no way to Determine how he's gonna do

51:13

and how father time is gonna is gonna come

51:15

but everything that we're seeing second half I know

51:17

that that September wasn't as good by having a

51:19

strong August It looked like that

51:21

he was a different player and look

51:23

like he was the health was coming back September

51:25

was just a weird month for

51:27

the Yankees also, so I Don't

51:30

know. I don't know how he's gonna age,

51:32

you know before that injury I always thought

51:34

that that DJ Lemayee would age gracefully within

51:37

the game of baseball because he's a guy

51:39

who can Who can spray

51:41

the ball, you know from from foul line

51:43

to foul line. He works the counts He's

51:45

a he's fundamentally sound in every possible way

51:48

again he's not the the flashiest of athletes

51:50

by any means but he does everything really

51:52

well and When you

51:54

get hampered by an injury that takes

51:57

away your mechanics and you know,

51:59

he's one of the more mechanics technically sound guys out there

52:01

instinctively. He's one of the best out there when

52:03

you have something that you can't control and father

52:05

time start saying, hey, guess what? You can't do

52:07

those same things that you you did. You can't

52:09

rely on your pure athleticism because that's not what

52:11

got you here. Then we

52:13

don't know we're going to have to see how

52:15

it plays out if that foot becomes an issue

52:17

at some point if it is a nagging thing,

52:20

then I think these projections might be a lot

52:22

closer than then we think and

52:24

he might be that guy and he will not

52:26

age gracefully if injuries are taking his

52:29

lower half. He needs his lower half

52:31

so badly. Whereas you guys see

52:33

a guy like Stanton who is dependent on

52:35

his upper half doesn't even use

52:37

his lower half and half the they're like opposite players.

52:39

So I agree

52:41

with everything you said on LeMahieu, but

52:43

unfortunately, if the projections are accurate and

52:45

he's a 257 390 slugging 103. He's

52:47

not going to be the lead off

52:49

guy that we're going

52:51

to have him be the lead off. And that's why

52:54

I know that everybody is banking and taking it and

52:56

judge talked about it at his at

52:58

his charity dinner about

53:01

DJ being the

53:04

lead off. Soto being

53:06

the number two and judge being the number three.

53:09

Great that in a perfect world. That's awesome. Like,

53:11

of course, DJ being the lead off guy with

53:13

with DJ, you know, being the guy that we

53:15

expect him to be and want him to be

53:18

and need him to be and the guy that

53:20

he has been that's outstanding. But what happens when

53:22

DJ is not that when DJ, you know, if

53:24

his if he's not getting on base the way

53:26

that, you know, we expected him

53:28

to get now you flip it. Now you have maybe

53:31

Glaber up there, maybe Verdugo up there. You're you

53:33

know, if they want to keep that righty lefty,

53:35

you're searching for a lead off a consistent lead

53:37

off piece at that point ahead of and I

53:39

and I know that we talked about Verdugo being

53:41

that split guy against righties. It seems

53:43

to make a lot of sense for I think we're

53:46

going to see him in that spot more than than

53:48

a lot of people think. And

53:51

again, if if if Volpi gets off to a

53:53

hot start, yeah, would not surprise me if

53:56

that if we see Volpi in that spot. He's

53:58

a kid, but like What does hot start

54:00

mean? We're not talking a week and a half.

54:02

What do you mean? If it's May 15th and he's producing

54:05

then fine. You want to stick them lead off, but it's going to

54:07

take some proof. They're going to have to let the season's going to

54:09

have to play out for a bit. And I

54:12

don't think they need to rush things in that regard. They

54:14

just don't. Yeah. Volpe,

54:16

we want to see improve with his

54:19

plate discipline. You talked about this in

54:21

his projections, you know, 228

54:23

hitter 307 on base percentage. It's just,

54:26

it's not good enough for, from

54:28

your, your starting shortstop, uh,

54:31

a consistent piece in this lineup. So we're trying

54:33

to pull some numbers from last year. His

54:36

strikeout percentage was 27.8%. His

54:40

walk percentage was eight, uh, 8.7%.

54:44

He, um, it's

54:47

weird because up until

54:49

when was this where,

54:52

what was it when he got put in the lead off

54:54

spot? Was that in May of last year? He went through month

54:56

spurts. It was like a few different, uh, it

54:59

was earlier in the season. I want to say it was

55:01

a point in the season where he wasn't getting a ton

55:03

of hits, but he was getting on base a lot. He

55:07

was stealing a lot of bases. He was

55:09

walking a lot. The bats were competitive. So

55:11

we were saying, well, even though the hits

55:14

aren't coming, like we expect those on comes

55:16

because he's getting on base. And if you're,

55:19

you're being selective at the plate and you're having

55:21

competitive at bats hits will come. And then quite

55:23

the opposite happened. Well, I

55:25

think that the book kind of got out on a Volpe a little bit

55:27

too. And, uh, the pitching adjustments, you know,

55:29

we're, we're

55:32

significantly harder for him to combat than what happened

55:34

in the beginning of the season when, you know,

55:36

guys just hadn't seen him as much yet. I think they

55:38

found out where his weak spots were and where, where he

55:40

would chase and, and they exploited that. So

55:44

now is the opportunity for him on year two, for

55:46

Volpe to make those adjustments. And you know, it, do

55:49

you believe that he's that cerebral guy that's going to make

55:51

those adjustments had the athleticism and the ability to

55:53

make those adjustments within the league, uh, to, uh,

55:55

to account for. the

56:00

way that the pitchers are pitching him

56:02

specifically. That's, that's, uh, that's where it's

56:05

on him now. Like, you know, the, the, it's a, it's

56:07

a chess board and he's got to make that adjustment. He's

56:09

got to cut those strikeouts down. And

56:13

then we looked at his first

56:15

pitch approach because there was also points in

56:17

the season where it didn't look like he

56:20

went through spurts where I'm going to swing at the first pitch,

56:22

try and be aggressive, try, try and get a strike and hit

56:24

that early. And then others where he just looked like I got

56:27

to take a pitch, try and work as that bat swung

56:29

at the first pitch 173 times in at bats where

56:31

he swung at

56:33

the first pitch, he hit 263 in the app

56:36

at, which is better than his season numbers

56:38

to a 689 OPS.

56:41

When he took the first pitch, that was 428 of his plate

56:43

appearances. He hit 186 in those at

56:48

bats to a 657 OPS. So

56:50

the OPS are close,

56:52

better with the swinging at the

56:55

first pitch, the batting average significantly

56:57

better when he swung at the

56:59

first pitch. What does that tell you? It

57:03

tells me something. It tells me something immediately. What does

57:05

it tell you? It tells me that, that when he

57:07

is aggressive and dictates what the at bat looks like,

57:09

he's in a much better position. And

57:11

when he does go after, uh, probably

57:14

true for every hitter. Yeah, but I understand that. But, but

57:17

he's got the ability to, to

57:19

make that contact when he's, when he's, if

57:22

he's looking for a particular thing in,

57:24

you know, in that first, in that his

57:27

approach to the at bat needs

57:29

to be disciplined in the sense that if he

57:31

sees a particular pitch in

57:33

a particular zone early in the count, he

57:35

needs to be aggressive. And I think that's

57:37

where the time comes into play, where he's

57:40

going to get a lot much more comfortable

57:42

and be able to pull the trigger much

57:44

more easily on, on the, the, the zone

57:47

or the pitch or the area, whatever he's

57:49

looking for to be aggressive on that. And

57:51

he's got to do that. His on-base percentage

57:53

will be higher because as he's making contact

57:55

his speed and everything else will, will, will

57:58

help that. I don't think he's. His

58:00

own base percentage is going to get higher because he's going to walk.

58:02

That's not what I'm saying for plate. No, more hits. It's

58:04

going to be more hits, exactly. It's going to be

58:07

him not chasing outside the zone when he's in a

58:09

position down in the count. And

58:11

he's got to dictate the at bat a lot

58:13

more. And I understand that that's not an easy

58:16

thing to do. Control the strike zone as Boone

58:18

has said multiple times. But he

58:20

does need to do that. And I think early

58:22

in the season, guys were like, okay, let's pepper

58:24

the plate a little bit, see what he could do. And

58:26

he was having success. And then they laid off

58:28

that a little bit and tried to work the count. And he

58:30

got exploited a little bit. And

58:33

we saw him chase a lot, which he wasn't

58:35

doing in the first month or so of the

58:37

season. The chase is just a result of pressure

58:39

and trying to do too much and

58:42

trying to get more hits

58:45

when the pitches are not there for you to get

58:47

hits on. It's also pressing. I think he pressed, which

58:50

is totally normal for a rookie to do when you

58:52

hit struggles. It's a matter of being

58:54

able to now mentally say, okay, I'm

58:56

pressing, stop pressing. And I don't think that's an

58:58

easy thing to do, especially as a young guy.

59:03

And last year, I mean, you look at it, it's like he

59:05

was moved from bottom of the order, top of the order, back

59:07

down to the bottom of the order. Then the team was struggling.

59:09

It was just it was kind of a cluster. And

59:12

that's a key thing. Like if you have

59:14

guys around you that are producing and the team is going

59:16

well offensively, that takes a lot of pressure off of him.

59:19

Not that there was a ton of pressure on him to be the guy

59:23

to ignite the offense

59:25

necessarily. But I

59:28

think that this is

59:30

a season where we've

59:32

said this, I've said this, I expect year

59:34

number two for Volpe to be a lot

59:36

closer to what he's going to

59:38

be career with. I think he's going to make adjustments quickly. At

59:41

least I hope so. And that's why I say if

59:43

in year number two, we still see a 220 hitter

59:46

and a below league average WRC plus, then like, are we

59:48

saying that's just what he's going to be? Like if he

59:50

doesn't take the jump in year two, I'm not saying it's

59:52

never going to happen, but really need it

59:54

to be this year. Especially when you have

59:56

one sort of an hour in the lineup, you know, if

59:58

all things remain have a healthy lineup

1:00:00

for the majority of the season, there's a hell of a lineup to

1:00:02

hit. And I expect if you're hitting a nine, you're going to get

1:00:04

a lot of pitches. He's going to get a lot of pitches over

1:00:07

the plate. Gleyber

1:00:10

Torres. So we're, we're

1:00:13

good with the projections that he has. But when

1:00:15

you look at some splits here, clearly, uh, mash

1:00:18

his left-handed hitters, not bad against right-handed

1:00:20

hitters, but the big difference is the

1:00:22

slugging percentage against left, EC slugs 546

1:00:24

against righties 432. And

1:00:26

so that results in a 9 21 OPS

1:00:28

against lefties and a 7 73 OPS against

1:00:34

righties. The batting average is pretty

1:00:36

similar on base percentage is a

1:00:39

big difference for lefties versus righties.

1:00:41

So it's really the power numbers

1:00:43

against, uh, lefties versus righties is, is

1:00:45

where the big difference is. Um,

1:00:48

and then I also think that Gleyber Torres

1:00:50

with, uh, clutch and late numbers, uh, can

1:00:52

be improved. And I think this comes with

1:00:54

plate discipline, which has never been a strength

1:00:56

of his. But when you

1:00:59

see situations in high leverage, Gleyber Torres, his

1:01:01

approach does not change from if it's a

1:01:03

nothing, nothing count in the first inning, nobody

1:01:05

on to bottom of the eighth inning and

1:01:08

run around third base. And he just

1:01:10

needs to put bat on ball. Unfortunately, his

1:01:12

approach doesn't change. And what that results in

1:01:14

is two outs with risk runs, scoring position,

1:01:16

675 OPS, late in close spots, 659 OPS.

1:01:18

We'd like

1:01:21

to see some better

1:01:24

numbers clutch stats. And,

1:01:26

um, I'm not even gonna say he needs to hit for

1:01:28

more power against righties, but if

1:01:30

those two numbers could come closer together, I

1:01:33

don't want him hitting for more power against righties. I gotta be

1:01:35

honest with you. I don't want that. I want him, I want

1:01:38

his approach to be consistent against righties. I want

1:01:40

to see him, uh, drive

1:01:43

the ball up the middle. I

1:01:45

want him to, uh, focus on that and lefties.

1:01:47

If he's, if he's gonna open up his hips

1:01:49

and try to fly out and smash the ball

1:01:51

over the, over the, uh, over

1:01:53

Yankee Stadium, a little bit, a little bit

1:01:56

more against, um, uh, left-handed pitching than, than

1:01:58

fine. But if he's able to control. control

1:02:00

his approach from lefty and righty

1:02:02

and keep it more consistent than great.

1:02:04

Look, I haven't

1:02:07

overly talked about

1:02:10

what I expect from Glaber yet.

1:02:12

I think he's going to have a big year. I think Glaber is going to exceed

1:02:15

these expectations. I think that he

1:02:18

is poised. Contract

1:02:21

year, hitting in a really big production spot in

1:02:23

this lineup, I think he's going to have a

1:02:25

big year. I really do. Last

1:02:28

year, we saw more consistency

1:02:30

out of him. We did. We

1:02:32

didn't see those peaks and valleys that we had talked about. I know

1:02:34

one of the points of discussion for him is if you look at

1:02:36

the numbers at the end of the day, at the end of the

1:02:38

season, they're pretty close. But

1:02:41

the big difference was his consistency. He didn't

1:02:43

go through those huge dips and

1:02:45

huge highs. He was pretty damn steady

1:02:47

for a lot of the season. Frankly,

1:02:49

he was one of the Yankees' most

1:02:52

dependable hitters last year. I expect him to have a

1:02:55

really big year this year. I

1:02:58

love the off-season videos. If

1:03:00

he's going to be hitting fourth or fifth in the lineup though, a lot

1:03:03

of runners are going to be on base because Soto and

1:03:05

Judge are hitting ahead of him. You

1:03:08

need to see some better numbers with men on base.

1:03:11

That's fine. He stays in that

1:03:13

approach. He stays in that line drive approach. The ball is going to

1:03:15

go out of the ballpark and he's going to hit gaps and he's

1:03:17

going to drive in a lot of runs. That's

1:03:22

a natural approach. He's got

1:03:24

some of the most talent on the team, I think.

1:03:26

He's one of those guys, one of the most talented

1:03:28

off- The talent has never been a question for Glaver

1:03:30

Twins. I understand that, but I think when you add

1:03:33

that talent with a little bit of age, wisdom, fatherhood

1:03:36

and consistency. His fatherhood has worked wonders.

1:03:39

It has, and for him. You

1:03:43

mix that with Judge

1:03:45

and Soto in the lineup. I

1:03:49

think there's good things on the horizon for him. I

1:03:51

need you to stop talking shit about him too. I

1:03:54

haven't talked shit about him the past

1:03:56

few weeks. He hasn't played a game.

1:04:02

And but I'm not gonna know I'm not gonna

1:04:04

stop talking shit about Glamour Torres if There's

1:04:08

shit that warrants him to talk I don't care

1:04:10

if he's having a good just because

1:04:12

he has a good game at

1:04:14

the plate if he has a Catastrophic mistake

1:04:16

on the base pass base pass or in

1:04:18

the field that cost the Yankees a game.

1:04:20

Why can't I talk shit about him? Because

1:04:24

you can't stop talking shit Well,

1:04:27

I'm gonna that's my vow Clark

1:04:29

Schmidt. I don't think you needed to make that

1:04:31

vow I don't think you needed to I think

1:04:33

that that is a you know an understood as

1:04:35

well-known Clark Schmidt it Just

1:04:40

get just stop getting crushed over the middle of

1:04:42

the plate like It

1:04:44

needs to get away even number five pitcher now. So does

1:04:46

it really matter as much? Oh That's

1:04:51

the answer but we want we're talking about

1:04:53

you got the ability to be much better

1:04:55

than what if Clark Schmidt is going to

1:04:58

Improve this is an area of improvement for

1:05:00

him Yeah that he did not

1:05:02

get swings and misses and this was our

1:05:04

eye test just in conversation that Clark

1:05:09

Schmidt doesn't walk a lot of guys But

1:05:11

he doesn't miss bats and he's getting he's giving up a

1:05:13

ton of hits and he's giving up a lot of hard

1:05:15

hits so he comes over the plate and

1:05:17

They're crushing them and the biggest problem or

1:05:20

50 you're right plus the biggest problem with

1:05:22

Clark Schmidt since he's been in the major

1:05:24

leagues Is being able to hit that glove

1:05:26

with consistency if you hit that glove with

1:05:28

what your your your battery mate is putting

1:05:31

down And is expecting where that

1:05:33

ball is gonna go Then

1:05:35

he will be a successful pitcher and his

1:05:37

numbers and metrics will be significantly higher One

1:05:40

of the numbers that was pulled Ilya pulled numbers on

1:05:42

him The the shadow the

1:05:44

shadow pitch is where he struggles to me

1:05:46

that's that's on the black Can he can

1:05:49

he hit the edges? Can he you know

1:05:51

bring that two-seamer back to the plate? Can

1:05:53

he start that two-seamer on the edge of

1:05:55

the plate and and and have it fade

1:05:58

off at times? Because what he's doing done

1:06:00

is he's missed the black of the plate and hit

1:06:02

way too much of the white and he's hitting way

1:06:04

too much of the heart, which means he hits barrels.

1:06:06

And when he hits barrels, it's a bad

1:06:08

thing for him. And he's

1:06:12

got the repertoire to

1:06:14

be a very

1:06:17

tough matchup for a lot of guys if

1:06:19

he can locate. Location, location, location.

1:06:21

For Clark Schmidt, that is the name of the

1:06:23

game. Yeah.

1:06:25

And so like you said, the shadow, shadow

1:06:28

pitches, edge of the strike zone. And

1:06:30

then his numbers when he falls behind in the

1:06:32

count are gone. He doesn't have the

1:06:34

putout pitch. Yeah, he's got to work ahead. He's got to, he's

1:06:36

got to, he's got to be,

1:06:39

he, but he's got to live on the edges of the plate. He

1:06:41

can't live over the middle of the plate. That's, that's the biggest thing

1:06:43

for him. And that way he doesn't have the stuff to live over

1:06:45

the middle of the plate. And then even when he was able to

1:06:47

get ahead and account, he didn't have a

1:06:49

put away pitch. So he had to come over to

1:06:51

the plate and get contact and the contact is hard.

1:06:53

So even if he was ahead one, two in the

1:06:55

count, he was still giving up hits. But

1:06:59

like you said, he's the number five pitcher. So

1:07:01

it's not like I, you don't need him to

1:07:03

be amazing, but this is an

1:07:05

area of improvement for him. If he's, if he's, if

1:07:07

he's going to be a better than number five pitcher,

1:07:10

which maybe he could be. Yeah, he

1:07:12

definitely could be. He absolutely could be. But the thing

1:07:14

is for him too, is that, and for the Yankees,

1:07:16

you know, they, they can't be relying on Clark Schmidt

1:07:19

from the number five spot to be a number

1:07:21

and him to eat innings. Basically. What my yeah,

1:07:24

but you, you can't have him

1:07:26

as a number five guy, number four or five

1:07:28

guys, you know, look

1:07:30

for production as a number two or

1:07:32

three because Carlos Redone, you know,

1:07:34

can't make it out of the fourth inning or,

1:07:36

you know, Nestor can't stay on the, on the

1:07:38

bump. Like you need the guys ahead of them

1:07:42

to be able to solve them and go deeper problem

1:07:44

going through the, going through the lineup for the

1:07:46

first time. He had a 689 OPS

1:07:48

allowed second time,

1:07:50

8 15 third time 9 10.

1:07:53

Yeah. Batter saw

1:07:55

him just twice in a game. And as

1:07:58

a number five pitcher, much more. You can get into. to the

1:08:00

some innings and he

1:08:03

doesn't need to be a huge innings either guy at the end.

1:08:05

Like you know that that guy's not going to be as good

1:08:07

on that third time around or fifth inning plus, but

1:08:10

you just can't have your second and

1:08:12

third guy in the rotation being

1:08:14

pulled in the fourth inning because now your bullpen

1:08:16

is completely fucked. Your bullpen's

1:08:18

there to pitch on the fourth and fifth days, not

1:08:20

the first and second days. And

1:08:23

that brings us to Carlos Rodone, who up

1:08:25

until last year, his strikeout percentage was

1:08:27

amazing. He ranked in 2021 in the

1:08:29

96th percentile, 2022

1:08:31

95th percentile last year, understand

1:08:34

injuries limited time, but

1:08:36

41st percentile, 22% strikeout

1:08:38

rate. Fangrass does have

1:08:40

him projected to have over 10 strikeouts

1:08:43

per nine innings this year. So they're projecting

1:08:45

for the strikeouts to come back. He is

1:08:47

a strikeout pitcher. He

1:08:49

needs to be a strikeout pitcher. He

1:08:51

needs to stop being an asshole and pitch

1:08:53

to his contract and be that guy. All

1:08:56

eyes are on Carlos Rodone this year, like

1:08:59

100%, like he's the focal point of

1:09:01

where the criticism will go. If

1:09:04

he doesn't come out of the gate hot, it can

1:09:06

be a long, long year for

1:09:08

him. And he needs it, man.

1:09:10

He needs to return to the guy

1:09:13

that they thought they were getting when they

1:09:15

paid for. That's the number

1:09:17

one, number two pitcher. You're

1:09:19

right. The criticism for him is going to be

1:09:21

there from day one, first time he steps on

1:09:23

the mound. But the good news for him is

1:09:25

there's a lot of flashy objects, one's hoto there

1:09:28

to distract people for a little bit. I don't

1:09:30

think that matters. For Carlos Rodone, with the money

1:09:32

that he's gotten and the history that we saw

1:09:34

for one year, there's a lot of people expecting

1:09:36

that guy to not be able to

1:09:38

mentally handle what's going to happen in

1:09:40

New York. And frankly, he has

1:09:43

proved nothing beyond the doubt of

1:09:45

fans. It's going to be pain

1:09:48

for him if he doesn't start out

1:09:50

of the gate hot. He needs to

1:09:52

be that guy. And

1:09:54

I don't care what flashy objects are around there. If he's

1:09:57

on the mound and he's not, and he's given up six

1:09:59

runs in three innings. and walking guys, he's

1:10:01

screwed. Yes. And

1:10:03

the Yankees are in a very tough position at that point.

1:10:06

He'll get booed and they'll flip off the crowd. And this

1:10:08

is exactly why, and I understand that

1:10:11

this isn't the way it should be because you paid for

1:10:13

a guy that should be giving you a much more consistent

1:10:16

rotation spot. But until

1:10:18

we've seen it, I don't know. And because there is

1:10:21

so much that relies on this one year that the

1:10:23

Yankees have with all these guys under contract that are

1:10:25

not gonna be under contract after this year, creating

1:10:28

depth in the starting rotation right now, when

1:10:30

they do have the opportunity to do that

1:10:32

with a guy like Clark Schmidt, is

1:10:35

asinine not to do. And that's

1:10:37

why I'm saying if some of these guys are coming

1:10:40

back on shorter term deals, would not surprise me if

1:10:42

they should be going

1:10:44

after them on the shorter term deals if that's

1:10:46

the case. They need, they have the ability, and

1:10:48

it's so difficult to create depth in a starting

1:10:50

rotation in the major leagues, and they have the

1:10:52

ability to do it right now. So

1:10:54

take a motion, it's hard to do, but try and take

1:10:56

a motion out of it. And look at it from the

1:10:58

objective lens. If you're betting money this year, are you betting

1:11:01

over or under on the 93.5 win total for

1:11:03

the Yankees? I'm

1:11:09

betting over because I

1:11:11

can't bet on, we're

1:11:14

opposite in this. Like I have a very difficult

1:11:16

time betting on injuries, and that's what I'd be

1:11:18

doing. If guys, the talent, everything

1:11:20

production wise. Well, no, that's the same thing. You're betting

1:11:22

on injuries not to happen. Correct,

1:11:25

that's what I'm saying. I don't bet on injuries

1:11:27

to happen. I can't predict injuries

1:11:29

to happen. And when I see the amount of flukey

1:11:31

injuries that are injuries, and you add one Soto, and

1:11:33

I think we're going half the stat back because that's,

1:11:36

I think he's closer to the guy that we paid

1:11:38

for than the guy that we saw last year. The

1:11:40

more ifs you had, the less chance you have to

1:11:42

hit that net. I understand that. Could they win 94

1:11:44

games or more? Obviously, they have

1:11:46

the talent to do so. I'm

1:11:49

just saying there's a lot of ifs to get

1:11:51

there. And when there's that many ifs, I would

1:11:53

not feel good about betting that over. I still

1:11:55

think the division is going to be highly competitive.

1:11:57

The Yankees should very clearly be.

1:12:00

at least a playoff team and

1:12:02

they're going to be, I think they're in

1:12:04

competition with Baltimore and Tampa and Toronto. That

1:12:06

is going to be a division race. I

1:12:09

just don't see with how the roster is

1:12:11

now. I don't see

1:12:13

with how the roster is now with two weeks

1:12:15

to go before spring training starts. I don't see

1:12:18

how this is a clear division winner. I don't,

1:12:20

I have to see it first. It's not a

1:12:23

clear division winner and the numbers that Vegas has

1:12:25

makes it a very clear division winner. And that's

1:12:27

five games. Yeah, yeah, yeah. That's wild. And

1:12:30

you know, Toronto, we didn't talk about this

1:12:32

quickly and it's not a major signing by

1:12:34

any means, but it's a really good sign.

1:12:36

They got Justin Turner. Justin

1:12:39

Turner is exactly what that team needs. I

1:12:41

mean, honestly, he is a professional hitter. I

1:12:43

know he's getting older, but the guy still

1:12:46

rakes and can hit. You put him in

1:12:48

a DH spot for Toronto and

1:12:50

he's just going to do what he's always

1:12:52

done. He's going to hit. 30 the problem. 39

1:12:55

years old. Yeah. I don't give a shit. 39 years old. Falls

1:13:01

off. He falls off a cliff with, which we

1:13:03

have not seen from him, but he

1:13:05

could. I mean, we've seen guys, you know,

1:13:08

hit that 39 40 and then boom, that's,

1:13:10

that's, uh, that's it. But I

1:13:12

don't know. He's just one of those guys, man, that,

1:13:14

that, that just continues to hit. And when you have

1:13:17

a team that's really young and, and

1:13:19

as talented as that group, um, adding

1:13:21

a guy like him, uh,

1:13:23

I think that's a, that's a, an X

1:13:25

factor for that lineup. All right.

1:13:27

That's going to wrap it up for today's episode, a

1:13:29

couple of weeks to go until pictures

1:13:32

and catchers report. So looking forward

1:13:34

to that. Once again, check out factor

1:13:36

factor meals.com/Bronx 50. If you want

1:13:38

some easy, uh, easy to prep, no

1:13:40

prep, uh, meal. Talk to

1:13:42

you guys soon. Hey

1:13:46

guys, thanks for listening to the Bronx pinstripe show.

1:13:49

Make sure you find us in iTunes and

1:13:51

subscribe so you can get all new episodes

1:13:53

directly onto your phone. If you do like

1:13:55

to show, we'd love for you to

1:13:57

take a minute and give us a five star rating and review

1:13:59

an iTunes. It really helps us out and

1:14:01

allows us to create more shows We're

1:14:03

on Twitter at Bronx pinstripes and the same

1:14:05

on Facebook. You can always find us there

1:14:07

talking Yankee baseball Thanks again guys

1:14:10

for your support. Really appreciate it and go Yankees