The Yankees no longer have any players (Giambi, Sheffield) forced into the field because the DH spot is taken. Damon is getting there and he probably will be sometime in 2010. Still, I’d rather have one bat too many than one too few. And if both Damon and Matsui are healthy they’ll be productive. If not, the Yankees have young options. It’s not like there’s an obvious alternative on the market.

There was only a logjam to people who thought that Nady was anything more than a league average hitter and a below average fielder who lacked plate discipline.

You mean like the manager and the GM?

The Yankees can afford “logjams”. And more often than not they work themselves out just fine. There was also a logjam for the Yankee rotation this year.

Which proves my point: length of contract does matter because it has consequences about how much a player will play.

How does a hypothetical “prove” your point? Jorge is still a well-above average player at his position. Whether he will be in two years remains to be seen. Since when has “framing pitches” been a measurable skill? And he’s never been good at blocking pitches. Catchers are usually forced from the position because they can’t throw out runners. That hasn’t been an issue for Jorge yet. The big worry is that Jorge gets hurt and misses significant time again. But if you plan on Jorge being an underpowered DH, and he does get hurt, you wind up with two weak bats in the lineup – the “defensive” catcher and a backup DH.

Jorge is a catcher like Jeter is a shortstop. Their value is so tied to their position it makes no sense to plan otherwise. That said, having a quality bench becomes extremely important.

The solution, imo, is to stop signing players whose defense is declining to multi-year contracts.

If you really think this we aren’t that far apart. The Yankees signing Damon and Matsui for two years, at most, is the best of the possible outcome in this dimension. It’s decent money on short contracts. The alternative is either signing Bay/Holliday for more money and years or trading for a guy like Dunn or Hawpe. Why give up prospects when they can get the same production for fewer dollars and no prospects on the free agent market?

No it doesn’t. There are plenty of examples of a younger rookie pushing aside a higher salaried, less talented veteran

The only reason that he would even be on the roster at that point is his contract. Cash thought it was dumb to give him four years at the time that contract was signed and that’s why he opposed it.

Which proves my point: length of contract does matter because it has consequences about how much a player will play.

I don’t understand what you mean by this. The solution to aging bats past their prime being overpaid is NOT to reserve the DH as spot to rotate them into and out of.

What is the solution? They aren’t going to cut them.

The solution, imo, is to stop signing players whose defense is declining to multi-year contracts.

In other words, how many games Posada can catch (in reference to [79]) is an issue independent from whether they should sign a full-time DH (i.e. a very good hitter who’s penciled in to DH most days). It would be highly imprudent, in my mind, not to carry a big bat to play DH on the thought that a one (or several) player(s) on the roster should DH some of the time in future.

The issue isn’t too many bats. The issue is too many aging bats belonging to overpaid players that are past their prime.

I don’t understand what you mean by this. The solution to aging bats past their prime being overpaid is NOT to reserve the DH as spot to rotate them into and out of.

There was only a logjam to people who thought that Nady was anything more than a league average hitter and a below average fielder who lacked plate discipline. He would have played his way out of the rotation even if he didn’t get hurt.

Like it isn’t foreseeable that a catcher who has already sustained a significant defensive decline won’t continue to decline at 40?

It’s not about being worried. It’s merely about prudent decision making.

It’s questionable whether he can continue to catch 100 games in 2010.

The issue isn’t too many bats. The issue is too many aging bats belonging to overpaid players that are past their prime.

I’m totally with you here. The Yankees have the money.

As for A-Jax and Montero, I not saying to bank on them in 2010. But they’re not bad insurance to have in case of injury to Damon and Matsui. Sign both and have the youngsters in AAA.

Sign Matsui and Damon for $18 million/year for two years. They get two very good bats at best and 1 very good bat at worst. Likely it will be something in-between.

Then if they have the at-bats available, the kids (Miranda too) will get a shot. If not the kids have more time to develop.

Win-win. And better than dropping twice as much cash for twice as many years on Bay or Holliday. Though if Bay is signed, I won’t be complaining. Still, in that case, make Damon the DH for 2 years.

It ain’t my money. The Yankees have plenty of it. Ticket sales alone net them >$200 million.