Swisher makes sense for the Giants?

Chris Haft of MLB.com seems to think so (silence, I’ll keell you!). Either way, Haft reminds us that Nady seems more likely to get dealt. In addition, MLBTR informs us (via information aggregation) that the Yankees have also discussed the two (Swish and Nady) with the Pirates (highly unlikely).

Neyer on Nady, Pettitte

Rob Neyer (ESPN) has two reads out on trading Nady and Andy Pettitte. I honestly don’t know what to make out of the Nady article, but the Pettitte one is fairly objective in that it provides both sides of the coin.

The spat that wasn’t

It was bound to happen. The objective Peter Gammons stated yesterday that, when in Texas, there was a “tenseness” between Alex Rodriguez and Mark Teixeira. The NY Post has picked up the “story” today and is using Gammons’ comments as fodder. Gammons, of course, didn’t provide any actual information or context in relation to his remarks, however. As a result, this is what we have now—a phony rivalry that will probably play out in the media for the next few years (I’m calling it).

Trading Nady

From Henry Schulman (via MLBTR):

Some speculation has arisen that the Giants might find a first baseman in New York, either Nick Swisher or Xavier Nady. I do not expect either will come to San Francisco.

I’ve been told by a good source that Yankees GM Brian Cashman wants to keep Swisher to replace Bobby Abreu in right field and deal Nady, who becomes a free agent after the 2009 season.

Schulman goes on to say that Nady hasn’t played enough at first base to really warrant a trade, although in 82 games at first he has an UZR of 3. I think he’d probably be average there. Schulman also wonders if Nady would be willing to sign an extension. However, his agent is Scott Boras so that could be a problem since Nady will likely pursue free agency once the season is over. While I wouldn’t place any bets on Schulman’s report, it is inline with Ken Davidoff’s article from earlier today (and Bryan Hoch’s, as well).

If you’re interested in some more Nady-speculation, check out RAB’s latest. It’s basically the same idea I proposed about a week ago (except with some more background regarding Harang’s abnormal 2008 campaign).

That’s nonsense…

Yesterday, at the LoHud Blog, I said the following:

Swisher should stay.

Damon or Nady could go. Damon makes the most sense from an offensive standpoint (Nady is better), but his value is tied to his position at the top of the order. If the Yankees dealt Damon and kept Nady and Swisher with Garnder in CF, the OF would be fine defensively (above average in LF/CF) and better offensively than any combination that includes Damon (unless you do Damon in LF, Nady in RF and Swisher in CF, that’s doable).

Now, here’s a response to my comment by “Aaron”:

IYankee, you’ve made two horrible points.. there is no way theyre trading damon, absolutely no way, #1 he’s a great lead off hitter, and had a great year last year.. 2 he recruited cc and aj, so why punish a guy who still can play who just helped you recruit to dominant pitchers.. 3 brett gardner sucks.

The other point was about IPK, but moving on, did I not acknowledge that Damon’s value is inherently linked to his role as a leadoff hitter (that’s why the Yankees probably won’t trade him)? Now onto this “he had a great year last year.” Yes, but he’s due for a regression, as I pointed out yesterday. He had an abnormally great year. Don’t expect the same in 2009.

Further, this “he recruited players” concept is absurd. I spoke with Yank Crank about this in the “Trade Damon” thread and he certainly agreed that if it makes sense for the team, then anyone is trade-worthy (no matter who they called during the winter). Clearly, Aaron has yet to realize that. In addition, Nick Swisher also helped to recruit CC because they’re good friends and yet he’s on the block right now. So, with regards to this, “he helped recruit X, so he should stay” idea, leave it alone. It makes no sense and it sounds ridiculous.

Teixeira Tidbit: Safeco Field

During Mark Teixeira’s press conference the other day, he stated that, in terms of modernized and “original” ballparks, his favorite modern ballpark was Safeco Field and his favorite “original” was Yankee Stadium. Now, I’ve been to plenty of games at both places and, I must say that the experience at Safeco is amazing because of the structure, the amenities, the cheap tickets, and so on and so forth. Obviously, Yankee Stadium is my favorite ballpark and I like it more than Safeco, but man, knowing that it’ll get Safeco-like upgrades should really make everyone excited to see a ballgame there.

Andy mad at the Yankees?

From Ken Davidoff (Newsday):

Andy Pettitte is extremely unhappy with how his negotiations have gone with the Yankees, and the lefthander might be softening on his opposition to rejoining the Astros.

What once seemed a fait accompli – Pettitte returning to the Yankees for a 12th season in pinstripes – now appears increasingly in jeopardy, although the two sides continue to communicate and they ultimately rank as each other’s first choice.

Pettitte recently rejected the Yankees’ offer of a $10 million salary for 2009, and a team source confirmed a New York Post report that the Yankees, with Mark Teixeira’s deal completed, are inclined to offer Pettitte even less money now. Pettitte made $16 million with the Yankees each of the previous two years and hoped to match that salary this year.

The 36-year-old’s grievances with the Yankees feature, most prominently, these three sentiments, according to people familiar with his thinking:

1. Pettitte believes that the Yankees should display more appreciation for all that he has done for them.

2. While the Yankees are asking that Pettitte take a pay cut, the team clearly is not hurting financially, given its large investments in Teixeira, CC Sabathia and A.J. Burnett.

3. Pettitte thinks that his 2008 season wasn’t as bad as the Yankees are making it out to be.

More on this later, but Davidoff also notes that the Yankees will likely trade Xavier Nady now in order to free up payroll (maybe for a starter?). He says that, due to Swisher’s poor 2008 (selling low) and the amount of money he is owed over the next 3 seasons, he’ll probably end up staying with the club.

Quick Bits: Gammons, Giambi, Scranton, Payroll, Nady/Swish

Real quick:

1. Peter Gammons is a tool.

2. Jason Giambi gave the Yanks props at his press conference in Oakland.

3. Chad Jennings attempts to piece together the Triple-A rotation.

4. Pete Caldera did the math and notes that as long as Andy doesn’t return, the team will be under its 2008 payroll.

5. Jon Heyman lets us know that the Yankees are, in fact, fielding offers for Nady and Swisher. To be honest, if the Yankees trade Swisher, I will personally picket Brian Cashman’s office and hold him accountable. That guy will hit 30+ homers for another team, if traded.