A problem of Vizquellian Proportions
It's not really that hard to divine what was going through the heads of the Giants' "brain trust" as they decided to sign Omar Vizquel to a 3-year, $12.25M deal. Their thinking on all of these decisions starts and stops with the utterly fallacious thinking that because the 2004 Giants were a 91-win team that scored 850 runs and missed the playoffs by one game, the 2005 Giants will be essentially the same team. Of course, with this impossibly foolish precept as the foundation for their thinking, they will proceed as if minor improvements will get the Giants those 1-2 extra wins and vault them into the playoffs in 2005. Winning in the playoffs, even under this analysis, is not a priority.
The thinking goes that the Giants middle-infield defense wasn't very good. The two shortstops on the 2004 roster, Deivi Cruz and Cody Ransom, are both poor-range defenders who don't flash particularly impressive leather. This, of course, is true. And as Tim pointed out in his review of shortstops below in the comments section, Vizquel represented a halfway decent 2005 stop-gap solution. And if they'd given him a 1-year, $4M contract with a mutual option year, by all means. Vizquel is still a decent player - he can play defense, draw walks, steal bases. I have no doubt we'll enjoy him in 2005. But for God's sake, the guy will be 38 when the season starts - teams with limited resources don't give 38-year-old players 3-year deals. Not everyone can be Barry Bonds (congrats on another well-deserved MVP, big guy) and it's unlikely that Vizquel is anything like him. Hell, the guy failed his physical when Cleveland tried to trade him to Seattle last year.
So basically Sabean signed a guy who is likely to help our team in 2005 and very likely to hurt our team in 2006 and 2007. He plays with a weak hand to begin with, and he plays it poorly. As I understand it, Vizquel had competing offers from several other teams. The winning move in such a scenario is to back out. Getting a guy for more than he's worth is the fabled "winner's curse" and that's what we have with Mr. Vizquel. In 2007 we'll have a $4.5M 40-year-old shortstop. Go Giants. For your enjoyment:
Vizquel:
Age 35 season: 582 AB .275 / .341 / .418
Age 36 season: 250 AB .244 / .321 / .336
Age 37 season: 567 AB .291 / .353 / .388
Shortstop X
Age 35 season: 583 AB / .293 / .390 / .420
Age 36 season: 396 AB / .313 / .389 / .487
Age 37 season: 156 AB / .256 / .373 / .372
Age 38 season: 507 AB / .245 / .305 / .367
Age 39 season: 241 AB / .282 / .345 / .382
Age 40 season: 346 AB / .289 / .352 / .419
It bears mentioning that Shortstop X is a better player than Omar Vizquel. And Shortstop X (Barry Larkin, obviously) didn't have to switch leagues after his age 37 season and move into one of the toughest ballparks in the NL to boot.
Go Giants.
WHAT THE HELL IS SABEAN DOING???
Why Omar Vizquel? Why for so long? Why for so much? And why give away ANOTHER first-round pick for NO REASON??? Cleveland had no intention of offering arbitration to Vizquel. I'm too angry to even analyze why this is so stupid it makes me want to vomit all over myself. Maybe someone can comment and give me an explanation that doesn't make me want to abandon my fandom of this team. It's like they're trying (really hard) to lose.
More unjustified hope
Note: There is no evidentiary basis for any of what follows.
Note also: This is the year for ideas with no evidentiary basis.
So I'm reading a fantasy baseball column on Rotoworld.com (can you tell I miss baseball season) and the author, one Matthew Pouliot (who writes with greater intelligence and a more obvious connection to reality than most fantasy baseball columnists, the majority of whom would finish last in most of my leagues based on the harebrained advice they dish out) is running over his projected lineups for the American League. It's an interesting and fun exercise, and one which I may try myself at some point later in the offseason.
At any rate, as I'm reading and skimming over the teams in the AL, I notice a couple of oddities in the entry for the Chicago White Sox. For one thing, they still have Paul Konerko, even though my assumption was/is that he will be traded. And as I scan down their starting lineup I was surprised to see:
C: A.J. Pierzynksi
And then further below:
RHP: Jerome Williams
Needless to say I read a little more closely, curious to see how he arrived at these two 2004 Giants being on the White Sox roster. What I see is that he envisions a "mutually beneficial" trade between these two teams. The trade sends Jerome and AJ to Chicago for Carlos Lee and Damaso Marte. The logic runs as follows: The White Sox want to trade one of Konerko or Lee, presumably for financial reasons (it's not for performance reasons, given that he has Lee being replaced in the White Sox lineup by either Carl Everett or Brian Jordan. The theory continues that it will be Lee that gets traded rather than Konerko, the market for the latter being depressed because of the presence of superior free agent options in the market, named Carlos Delgado and Richie Sexson.
Let's examine the premises of this trade and see if it's either feasible or beneficial (to the Giants) or both.
First off, let's at least look at the assertion that Konerko will run distant third to Delgado and Sexson in the 2005 market.
2004 Stats:
Konerko: Age 28; 563 AB; .277 / .359 / .535 / 41 HR / 117 RBI / 107 K
Delgado: Age 32; 458 AB; .269 / .372 / .535 / 32 HR / 99 RBI / 115 K
Sexson: Age 29: 90 AB; .233 / .337 / .578 / 9 HR / 23 RBI / 21 K
3-year averages:
Konerko: 525 AB; .275 / .344 / .483 / 29 HR / 95 RBI / 75 K
Deldago: 511 AB; 284 / .403 / .561 / 35 HR / 114 RBI / 126 K
Sexson: 422 AB; .273 / .369 / .530 / 21 HR / 83 RBI / 103 K
Of course, all of these numbers arguably don't tell the whole story. Konerko had his best year in 2004 while Sexson only logged 90 ABs because of injuries. Delgado had an off-season. The 3-year numbers reflect that each of them has had one year that was either off because of performance (Konerko's 2003) or injuries (Delgado's and Sexson's 2004).
I think it's safe to say that Delgado is a better hitter than Konerko, but that doesn't mean he's a better investment. For one thing he's four years older. Let's look at a couple of examples:
Slugger X: Age 31 season: .314 / .435 / .598
Slugger X: Age 32 season: .250 / .412 / .527
Slugger X: Age 33 season: .208 / .342 / .379
Slugger Y: Age 31 season: .337 / .402 / .591
Slugger Y: Age 32 season: .281 / .358 / .508
Slugger Y: Age 33 season: .272 / .365 / .498
Of course there are plenty of counterexamples to Sluggers X and Y (Jason Giambi and Mo Vaughn) but both were big, slugging 1B/DH types just like Delgado and both began to decline and fall to injuries around Delgado's age, so to simply assume that Delgado will rebound from 2004 and go back to being the monster he was before is foolish.
As far as Sexson is concerned, he's always been a little overrated because he hits 40 homers and because when he does get ahold of one he hits it so damn far. But this is a guy who has never hit .300 over a season, never had an OBP of .380 and never slugged .600, despite playing in some pretty favorable ballparks. So he doesn't really deserve to be in the same discussion as Delgado, especially since he's coming off a shoulder injury that caused him to miss almost all of the 2004 season.
Which brings us to Konerko. At age 28, he just had his best season at the plate, following his worst season (a downright depressing .305 / .399) 2003. But if you view 2003 as a fluke, you're talking about a player who has a very defined level of performance:
1999: .863
2000: .844
2001: .856
2002: .857
2004: .894
My guess is that this represents Konerko's performance level, and that he'll probably have a career year some time in the next three years when his batting average, stable at around .285 for the most part, will spike up to .310 and he'll put up a Jeff Kent 2000 season, something like .310 / .395 / .580. Konerko is a solid slugging 1B but is not likely to ever have the kind of career peak that others mentioned in this post (Delgado, Giambi, Vaughn) have enjoyed.
Let's look at one other axis:
2004 Salaries
Konerko: $8M
Delgado: $19.7M
Sexson: $8.75M
In my view, Konerko probably represents the best investment of these three, given the injury concerns for both the other two and their higher price tags. But that's just me. Let's move on, since this was a long diversion (like something else I could name...)
Turning to the trade itself, let's examine the players:
Carlos Lee. I love this guy, with caveats.
He can hit a lot, but often only does so in the second half (2002 and 2003). He's a lot like Konerko has a hitter, actually - hits for a decent average, draws enough walks but not a ton, hits for good power (although he's yet to have the 40-homer season that Konerko just had). He's more useful than Konerko on the basepaths (29 steals over the last two years on 38 attempts) and doesn't strike out much (which you all know doesn't matter that much to me).
One thing I do like a lot about him is that he doesn't hit a lot of ground balls, relatively speaking. In 2004 his GB/FB ratio was 0.68. If we're auditioning the guy for the spot behind Bonds, this is crucial. We've learned the hard way with our various slow, groundball-hitting catchers that if you put a ground ball hitter behind a guy who's constantly on base, you wind up with a lot of double plays. This is why I used to want to see Rich Aurilia hitting behind Bonds (back when he was good), because he hit a lot of fly balls.
A problem - he plays left field. For some reason a lot of commentators looking at potential right fielders for the Giants are looking mostly at mashing left fielders like Lee and Alou. I'm not sure why - Lee isn't a particularly good left fielder despite his natural speed, so he'd have to be really terrific at the plate in order to be valuable given his likely defense in right.
The upside is this:
2nd half, 2002: .283 / .407 / .521
2nd half, 2003: .325 / .350 / .569
Season, 2004: .305 / .366 / .525
2nd half, 2004: .322 / .376 / .599
There are a lot of hitting skills here, and they're possessed by a 28-year-old outfielder with speed who manages to stay on the field (569 ABs average over the last 3 years). He hasn't hit better at Commiskey than away from it. He doesn't have big platoon splits (in fact has a slight reverse platoon split).
So really the evaluation on Lee comes down to defense and cost. He made $6.5M in 2004 and earned it. But he'll be more expensive in 2005. He'll make $8M in 2005. If he can manage to string two of those big halves together and hit .315 / .375 / .550 for a whole season, he'll be worth it. It will be left to people with a better sense of defense than me to decide if he is capable of manning right field at SBC Park.
Damaso Marte. Are we smart enough to trade for this guy? All he's done is strike out 269 batters in 258 major-league innings. 2004 was his worst year, mostly because he allowed 10 home runs after allowing only 3 the previous year. Other than that, his peripherals were pretty steady. He has a career 3.10 / 1.18 line over those 258 innings. He's left-handed and he absolutely devours lefties, who hit a pathetic .154 / .245 / .225 off him over the last three years. He's also effective against righties, who hit .238 / .320 / .368 off him over the same period.
He has closed a little for the White Sox (27 career saves) but has blown too many for them. Remember, this is the same team that gave up on Keith Foulke. Marte would be a fantastic addition to the Giants bullpen, and hasn't yet gotten too expensive (although he is arbitration-eligible this year).
So it's safe to say that the Giants get a lot of value in this deal, although there are caveats about whether or not Carlos Lee fits into a team that clearly does not have an opening in left field. Let's look at what the Giants would be giving up.
AJ Pierzynski - my views on him are well-known. He's not nearly good enough to justify either his cost ($3.5M in 2004 and only going up) or his personality. His stats in SF are not likely ever reach his 2003 career season in Minnesota. He's not particularly good defensively and is a clubhouse cancer. The White Sox can have him. I am a little curious that the Giants don't get Miguel Olivo in this deal, though.
Jerome Williams - this is who we're really giving up in this trade. People have hopes for Jerome ranging from solid #3 starter to staff ace. So far he's been more the first than the second, averaging 130 innings of .377 / 1.28 ball with a merely adequate strikeout rate. But he's 22 and there are a lot of possible futures for him. Truth be told, while I like him, I was never as high on him as a lot of others. I expected Foppert to be the one of 2003's "big three" prospects that turned into an ace. But if Kenny Williams (and his noted disdain for the "fantasy baseball" approach of, say, Theo Epstein) can be convinced that Jerome is 200 innings of 3.30 / 1.25 waiting to happen (which might actually be true) for several cheap years, and if he's unhappy with Marte for whatever reason (we know he's bad at reliever evaluations - he traded Foulke for Billy Koch), this is a deal that could actually get done.
So IF Carlos Lee can play right field for the Giants, I think this would make the team better. It could get done because it saves the White Sox money and gives them a starter they feel they need and gives the Giants both the slugger they need to back up Barry as well as a guy who will immediately become the best reliever in the bullpen (but does he have enough moxie... hrm...). If this deal is to get done, The White Sox will have to have given up on 26-year-old Miguel Olivo. Personally, I think that's a little crazy, and would be happy to see the Giants pick him up and make a project out of him. I think his strong first half in 2004 (.264 / .310 / .486) demonstrated some actual hitting skills. But that's a separate issue. I don't think the Giants are going to get even Kenny Williams to just throw Olivo into the deal. And I'd take it the way its been presented, given a favorable defensive evaluation.
Maybe Moises
I suppose it was inevitable that this rumor / news would come up. Despite playing for the ultimate players' manager, a guy that gets more out of his players than anyone else in the game, Moises Alou is talking about leaving the Chicago Cubs and coming to San Francisco to play for his dad. The real question is - do we want him?
The good
He can still hit. Alou was a great hitter this year and stayed healthy. His .293 / .361 / .557 line over 601 (!!!) ABs for Chicago made him extremely valuable, and an all-star. He hit 39 home runs. For those who care about such things, 106 runs and 106 RBI. I know that "Goliath himself couldn't protect Barry Bonds" but having Alou instead of the collection of scraps we had hitting 5th this year probably would have put Barry at 150+ runs scored and the Giants in the playoffs.
He got better as the season wore in in 2004. Pre-break: .836. Post-break: 1.017. (!) He's actually been a second-half player for years.
The Bad
He's old. 38. Imagine a starting outfield of Bonds (40), Grissom (38) and Alou (38). He's managed to stay healthy the last two years, but injuries are an issue.
He can't field. I mean, he's a left fielder with a bad arm. We're talking about having him play right field at Pac Bell Park? That seems like a very bad idea. Playing right in our yard is tough, and he's not even a particularly good left fielder. We might gain on offense (well, we WILL gain on offense) if he hits like he did last year, but there will be a lot of cringe-worthy defense if he's playing right.
Wrigley really helped him. Over the last three years with the Cubs, he logged 1,650 ABs total (really good for a brittle guy). Look at this:
Home: 782 AB; .304 / .381 / .559
Road: 868 AB; .264 /.327 / .417
These splits were never so stark as they were in 2004:
Home: 301 AB; .339 / .405 / .714
Road: 300 AB; .247 / .316 / .400
Those are Coors-like splits, folks, and unless we think there's a good reason that they are misleading, attention must be paid. For reference:
Tucker: .256 / .353 / .412
The Ridiculous
They aren't talking about having hit 3rd. They aren't talking about moving Bonds back to 3rd and having Alou hit 4th. No, they're talking about having Alou hit 5th, presumably leaving the likes of JT Snow, Pedro Feliz or AJ Pierzynski hitting third. Madness is sweeping this country in more ways than one.
Conclusion
I can't sign onto this one. Given his age and his home/road splits I just don't see Alou hitting like he did in 2004 for the Giants in 2005. And he'd need to hit that way to be a real asset. More likely he'll hit somewhere in the same vicinity that Tucker did or maybe a little better while being a terrible liability in right field and giving fly ball pitchers (of which the Giants have several) fits as balls dropped all over the field. I started this entry hoping I could sign onto Moises Alou for one year, $4.5M, but I'm afraid I just can't do it.
Which almost assuredly means it will happen.
Comments
Just to let everyone know, you can now leave comments at the bottom of each post. Leaving them will give me an idea that people are actually reading, which will encourage more posting. If that's desirable.
Standing Pat
I think a few were expecting to see some off-topic election ranting in this space, and truth be told, I considered it. But that's not what this space is for, and so I'll refrain, and stick to why we're here - the Giants.
The Giants made a number of unsurprising moves, and these moves say a lot about what we can expect in the next year. Suffice it to say, we're going to have a very similar to team to the one we had last year.
Deivi Cruz signed: This isn't any kind of surprise. Cruz has, as I and many others have noted, a surprising and helpful season for the Giants in 2004. Is anyone shocked that they read this to mean that, at age 31, he's become a better player? Here's what Cruz did for a few years before getting to the Giants:
2003: .250 / .269 / .378 over 548 ABs with the Orioles
2002: .263 / .294 / .366 over 514 ABs with the Padres
2001: .256 / .291 / .379 over 414 ABs with the Tigers
So the question is, which is the real Cruz? That 1,500 AB span or his 397 ABs of .292 / .322 / .431 in 2004 with the Giants? His offense is highly dependent on batting average, and .292 was his highest since 2000. If he hits .292 again, he'll be valuable. If he regresses to the previous 3 years and hits .258, he won't be.
The good news is at least they didn't pay too much for him. After the team gave Neifi Perez a 2-year, multi-million dollar contract I was terrified at what they'd do with Cruz. But in a rare move, he was signed to a one-year, $800,000 (guaranteed) deal with some incentives. At this price, I don't feel bad about him being on the roster even if he isn't very good.
JT Snow's option picked up: How great was Snow in 2004? And how unlikely that he'll be similarly great in 2005? Snow was largely considered to be on his way out, of the Giants and possibly of the league at age 36, but then he put up an Edgar Martinez-like line in 2004 and so now he'll be back, for $2M in 2005, presumably playing 1B against right-handed pitchers and playing good defense. Obviously if he recreates 2004 he's very valuable for $2M, but if he returns to the previous few years (where he still got on base, but didn't hit for anything like the average or power of 2004) he'll be merely acceptable. Snow isn't really a problem, given his likely .380+ OBP, but first base was an area where the Giants could have improved, and now won't.
Here's what really bugs me, as will surprise no one. They also picked up Marquis Grissom's $2.5M option. I mean come on - how much blood do you want to squeeze from a stone? It's hard to believe the Giants still haven't realized that Grissom is a platoon player. I just don't see how it's hard to figure it out. He wasn't good overall in 2004 like he was in 2003 (although still performed over my projection):
2004: .279 / .323 / .450 over 562 ABs. Of course, the problem is really this:
Vs. RHP: .266 / .311 / .404 over 413 ABs
VS. LHP: .315 / .356 / .577 over 149 ABs
Are you really trying to tell me that those 413 ABs can't be put to more productive use? Grissom isn't Andruw Jones, Jim Edmonds or Tsyoshi Shinjo in the field anymore. He once was, but now he's 37 and will turn 38 in April, and there aren't many good 38-year-old center fielders. Just for giggles:
Dustan Mohr vs. RHP: .297 / .433 / .466 over 148 ABs
Mohr looks a little silly, but he could play CF in a platoon with Grissom and actually give the Giants good offense out of the CF position. Of course, we've been over this before with other players and it hasn't happened, and won't now. The Giants have an expensive weapon in Grissom that they will make into a moderately-priced liability by playing him full-time. It's obviously wrong and has been obviously wrong for several years and they will continue to do it.
Finally, they also picked up the $2.5M option on Brett "Bombko" Tomko. I guess that's what he gets for pitching really REALLY well down the stretch (which admittedly, he did). I don't have too much to say about this. Tomko pitched well enough to be worth $2.5M in 2005, but I don't believe he'll pitch the way he did in the second half. If he does, and gives the Giants about 200 innings of slightly above-average pitching, he'll be a reasonable investment. Still, I've already gone on the record that I want the Giants to sign Brad Radke, and that creates a logjam in the rotation. At that point, we'd be looking at Schmidt, Radke, Rueter, Tomko, Williams and Lowry all deserving of rotation spots, with Foppert on the outside looking in. They say you can never have too much starting pitching, and I generally agree, but if Tomko pitches like he did in the first half he's a liability. We can hope that his second half represents a breakout. He's 31. It's possible. And that second half (3.15 ERA / 6.6 innings per start /2-1 K-BB ratio after the break) was really very impressive.
Strange note on Tomko - he pitched far better on the road than at SBC. I have no real explanation for this.
Just to show there is some modicum of sanity in the front office, at least Jason Christianson's $3.25M option was declined. Christianson never got anywhere near the flak, but his contract was probably a worse investment than Marvin Benard's. At least Benard used to be good.
So at this point improvement is going to have to come either in right field, catcher or pitching. I think we all expect movement within the bullpen, and Tucker's got another year under contract, so we're looking at basically the same team as last year, but with (in theory) better relievers. I'm sure the thinking is that we missed the playoffs by a game, so getting a better set of relievers will push us over the top ... into a first-round playoff exit. And even that assumption is flawed, since that assumes that none of Bonds, Snow or Cruz decline at all from 2004. All are likely to do so, as is Lowry.
Will continue to post on moves. If the Giants sign Magglio Ordonez to play right field, then we'll talk about the playoffs.
The overratedness of Brian Cashman
A friend emailed me this question, and since the response kind of took on a life of its own, I figured I'd put it up here:
I found myself in a minority at an office party last week with my argument that Cashman's an overrated GM. And these were Mets fans, not Yankees fans. My basic argument is that Cashman has, respective to anyone else, an unlimited budget and a team for which free agents (generally) want to play, yet he ends up with Tony Clark (Tiger reject) splitting with Olerud at first, and with Miguel Cairo at second. I know he had Giambi slated for first, but if Cashman had taken the gazillion dollars he's paying A-Rod and spent it on a quality utility infielder/first baseman/second baseman and another decent reliever, they'd have been even more dominant this year and may have avoided The Collapse. Also, who exactly has Cashman brought up through the farm system? He wasn't around when Jeter/Williams/Posada/Rivera were drafted and brought up. - Josh
I absolutely couldn't agree more. He had $183M to spend on his team, and he still only wound up with about 16 good players on his 25-man roster. Put it this way - this is the Yankees' final 25:
C: Posada / Flaherty
1B: Olerud / Clark
2B: Cairo
SS: Jeter
3B: Pay-Rod
IF: E. Wilson
LF: Matsui
CF: Bernie
RF: Sheffield
OF: Lofton
OF: Bubba Crosby
DH: Ruben Sierra
SP: Mussina
SP: Brown
SP: Vazquez
SP: El Duque
SP: Lieber
RHP: Rivera
RHP: Gordon
RHP: Quantrill
RHP: Sturtze
RHP: Loaiza
LHP: Heredia
Of that 25-man roster you essentially have nine stars that make most of the money (Posada, Jeter, Pay-Rod, Matsui, Sheffield, Mussina, Brown, Vazquez and Rivera), one player who produces more than he earns (Gordon), a bunch of expensive, washed-up veterans (Bernie, Sierra, Olerud, Lofton, Quantrill) and a bunch of scrubs (Flaherty, Cairo, Clark, Wilson, Crosby, Lieber, Sturtze, Loiaza, Heredia).
On a team that spends $183M there should only be stars and solid midlevel players. Cashman is fine as long as he can just overbid for the best players (although even that is generous, as he picked up Brown and Vazquez for a ton of money and neither performed for him - but I don' t think that's his fault. I expected both to do well. Still, if you look at failed experiments like Steve Karsay, Chris Hammond, etc... ), but is actually very much like Brian Sabean when it comes to picking up quality replacement-level players. He equates experience with talent. Compare the efforts of Theo Epstein at specific positions to those of Cashman:
First Base
Cashman signs GIambi to a gazillion-dollar contract, then when Giambi gets hurt Cashman picks up Tony Clark off the scrap heap (after he wasn't good enough for either the Red Sox or the Tigers) and Olerud, who was cut by the Mariners. He couldn't have traded for someone better than that? Hell, I imagine Ricciardi would have traded Delgado...
Epstein, by contrast, claims Kevin Millar off waivers when the Marlins try to sell him to Japan without passing him through waivers first. Millar costs a paltry fraction of what Giambi or even Olerud cost the Yankees. Millar posts an OPS of about .840 over his two seasons (about $6M) for the Red Sox.
Designated Hitter:
This one just seems too easy. All you have to do is sign a big fat guy who can hit homers, right? Yet the Yankees never seem to do it right. Ruben Sierra? You've got to be kidding me. Sierra was a pretty good player, once upon a time. Of course, we were in high school then. His last good full season was 1991, when he had an .859 OPS for Texas. Since then he's been above replacement-level just once, in 2001 for 344 ABs, also for the Rangers. As Joe Sheehan is so fond of saying, $183M should buy more than this. For the Yankees to have a 40-year-old DH with a .752 OPS is utterly pathetic. This is what happens when Cashman tries to sign players that don't cost eight figures. By contrast, even Tino Martinez was better than this, posting an .823 OPS for Tampa Bay. Of course, Tino was also better than the first basemen on the Yanks roster.
Who did Theo sign? David Ortiz. He basically got him for free from the Twins. He made $4.5M this year because of an arbitration award after his monster year last year, and will make a lot of money soon, but he was around $7M these last two years and was an MVP candidate both years. I don't think anyone saw how good Ortiz was going to be (he was good with Minnesota, putting up an .839 OPS with huge platoon splits, but he wasn't signed to play full-time initially) but he was clearly a productive player who was in his prime (age 27) when Theo signed him.
Infielders:
Both teams had to find second basemen. The Yankees had traded Soriano to get A-Rod and Todd Walker had been allowed to leave to be overpaid by the Cubs. Everyone expected Cashman to trade for someone great (Kent? Durham? Vidro?) but didn't get a deal done, partially because he has nothing to trade away. So he elevated backup Miguel Cairo to a full-time job. The results were predictable: .292 / .346 / .417 from the Yankees second baseman. That's actually a little better than I'd have expected from Cairo, but as I wrote above - $183M should buy more than this.
Of course Theo signed one of my favorite guys, Mark Bellhorn. I had him on my fantasy team when he broke out with the Cubs, then laid off him last year. All he does is walk and hit for some power. Sure, he strikes out a lot, but he gave the Red Sox the season they thought they'd gotten from Walker the year before. Got on base a ton for the big hitters and scored a bunch of runs.
In addition, the previous year Theo had inherited Shea Hillenbrand, who you could tell was someone he was itching to give away (which he did). Who did he start in his place? Former Giant Bill Mueller, another guy with great strike-zone judgment. Mueller won the batting title and contended for the 2003 MVP.
Outfielders:
Hard to really fault Cashman for his outfield. Matsui and Sheffield were both his signings and both were terrific this year. Bernie is clearly over the hill, but his contract is immovable and he was a great player when that deal was signed.
Similarly, not a lot to say about the Red Sox outfield. Damon is a star who is good but underperforms relative to his salary, but he was signed by Duquette. Similarly, Nixon is a budding star who's been in the organizaition forever and Manny is a star with the second-largest contract in the game. His backup outfielders are better than the useless nobodies that Cashman picked up, but Kapler and Dave Roberts aren't stars either. Still, they're good situational players.
Pitching
Getting long here, but just briefly - compare Mike Timlin to Tanyon Sturtze and Alan Embree to Felix Heredia. Mariano and Gordon are stars, but Cashman's bullpen basically sucked besides them.
So yeah - he's totally and massively overrated. I could build a better team for $130M than he built for $183M. And so can Theo. :-)
P.S. The best prospect to be developed under Cashman is Soriano. He's drafted a couple of good players, but for the most part trades them away before they make it up to the big club.
