October 29th, 2021: Closer, Suzuki, Mailbag

The other day I said I don’t really care who wins the World Series. I was wrong. As soon as Game 1 got underway, I found myself pulling for the Braves. I underrated my vindictiveness. I don’t want the Astros to win something that can be considered a legitimate championship with their sign-stealing core. So, go Braves. Don’t barves it up.

One way or the other, the World Series will be over at this time next week, and we’ll be a few days into an offseason loaded with uncertainty. What will the Yankees do? What will the new Collective Bargaining Agreement look like? Is the summer humidity gone for good in New York? Many questions to be answered in the coming weeks. Let’s get to today’s mailbag heavy post.

1. The closer situation. Seven pitchers recorded a save for the Yankees this past season and I’m not sure whether I’m surprised it’s that many or that few. There was that stretch in August where six different pitchers recorded a save in an eight-game span, and every other day someone came in to bail out someone else with runners on base in the ninth.

Here, for posterity, is the 2021 Yankees saves leaderboard:

1. Aroldis Chapman: 30
2. Chad Green: 6
3. Jonathan Loaisiga: 5
4. Wandy Peralta: 3
5. Albert Abreu, Zack Britton, Lucas Luetge: 1 each

Can’t say “Wandy Peralta saves more games for the 2021 Yankees than Zack Britton” is a thing I expected to happen going into the season. And just for the record, five pitchers recorded a save during the 60-game season a year ago (including David Hale), and eight pitchers recorded a save in 2019 (including Chance Adams!).

There’s no reason to think anyone other than Chapman will be the closer in 2022. Even when he was at his worst this year, the Yankees kept giving him save opportunities, so they’re willing to force the issue. A trade is unlikely. They’d have to kick in a good prospect(s) or eat money to make it happen, plus Chapman has a no-trade clause* and hasn’t indicated he wants to leave.

* Chapman’s contract includes a full no-trade clause, but even if it didn’t, he picked up 5-and-10 rights this season. He’s not going anywhere unless he wants to go somewhere.

Chapman will be the closer come Opening Day 2022, though after the season he just had, the position seems more unsettled than any point since … Mariano Rivera retired? Yeah, probably. No one is Rivera, though the Yankees have did a pretty good job replacing him with quality closers. This season was the first time they had to scramble in the ninth inning a bit.

Next season is the final season on Chapman’s contract and I wonder a) whether that means the Yankees will be quicker to pull him from the ninth inning should he struggle again, and b) what the plan is beyond 2022. With no long-term commitment, it’s easier to yank Chapman from the ninth inning. You don’t have to worry about what it means for the relationship going forward.

The second question isn’t worth worrying about now given how unpredictable bullpens can be -- who had Clay Holmes emerging as an ace reliever come postseason time? -- though it seems to me the Yankees already have a great closer-in-waiting in Loaisiga. He’s excellent, first and foremost, and he’s shown the guts necessary for the job too.

Loaisiga is a weapon as a multi-inning fireman reliever, though the multi-inning reliever thing never seems to last. Green has done it as long and as well as anyone. Others like Dellin Betances, Josh Hader, Raisel Iglesias, and Seth Lugo broke in as multi-inning guys, then settled into traditional one-inning roles. The multi-inning role is demanding and hard to do long-term.

Also, Loaisiga’s injury history is lengthy (it’s all arm injuries too), and a one-inning role in which he has an assigned inning could be the best way to keep him healthy long-term. It would allow him to develop a more consistent routine, theoretically throw fewer pitches while fatigued, etc. I love the guy, but I’m not sure Loaisiga is built to last as a multi-inning weapon.

Anyway, I think we can see the path forward with the closer’s position. The Yankees will begin next year with Chapman in the ninth inning because he’s their guy, feel their way through the season and adjust as necessary, then let him leave as a free agent and make Loaisiga the closer in 2023. You never know with bullpens, but that seems like the perfect world scenario.

Britton, Chapman, and Green will all become free agents next offseason, so change is coming to the bullpen one way or another. Health permitting, Loaisiga is the long-term centerpiece, plus Holmes and Peralta (and Mike King) are under control beyond 2023. Maybe then a Deivi Garcia or Luis Gil or Stephen Ridings or Clarke Schmidt emerges as a bullpen force too.

The Yankees are pretty good at building bullpens -- there are hiccups along the way each year, though that comes with the territory -- and I trust them to figure things out in 2022 and beyond. Given what we know right now, Chapman as the closer in 2022 and Loaisiga as the closer in 2023 and beyond is plausible, if not ideal. Johnny Loaisiga seems well-suited for the job.

2. Suzuki likely to be posted. The Hiroshima Carp in Japan are likely to post outfielder Seiya Suzuki this offseason, according to Yahoo Japan. Nothing is official yet because the season isn’t over in Japan, though Tom Mussa says Hiroshima has started the paperwork and Suzuki will soon go through the relevant medical examinations.

The Yankees have a rich history with big name Japanese players (Hideki Irabu, Hiroki Kuroda, Hideki Matsui, Ichiro Suzuki, Masahiro Tanaka, etc.), but since Kei Igawa, they have only pursued the best of the best. Tanaka and Shohei Ohtani. That’s pretty much it. They have not seriously pursued any other Japanese players via the posting system since Igawa.

So who is Suzuki? Would the Yankees have interest? Does he even fit the roster? Let’s dive into this offseason’s big name overseas import.

Is Suzuki good?

Yes, he’s very good. Suzuki has been the best position player in Japan the last few seasons and Jeff Passan recently said he “will be the best player to come from Japan since Shohei Ohtani -- and the best outfielder since Hideki Matsui debuted in 2003.” Suzuki turned only 27 in August, so he’s right smack in his prime. He is the very best Japan has to offer.

This season Suzuki, a righty hitter, hit .319/.436/.644 (202 wRC+) with 38 homers and a league-leading +8.4 WAR in 130 games. He walked as much as he struck out (16.4%) and had the fourth lowest ground ball rate (33.8%) and fourth highest hard contact rate (44.8%) in Japan. Here’s some video and here’s a quick offensive scouting report from Mussa:

Mechanically speaking there’s a lot to like about Suzuki’s swing … It's a short, no-nonsense type of swing that works well with his typically patient approach. He has some of the strongest hands and fastest bat speeds in the league. He transfers his power from load to hips so well. He’s quick to the ball on a great swing path that allows him to get to fastballs on the inside and all over the plate. Suzuki gives me confidence for potential success against major league pitchers because of these factors of his swing. It’s beautiful.

“He’s been the best player in Japan the last few years,” a scout told Dylan Hernandez in August, likening Suzuki to A.J. Pollock. “He’s a five-tool guy.”

Pollock may not be the most exciting comp, but Pollock hit .297/.355/.536 (137 wRC+) this year and has hit .284/.341/.497 (121 wRC+) in nearly 3,000 plate appearances since 2014. He’s averaged +4.1 WAR per 600 plate appearances those years. Pollock isn’t an MVP candidate or anything, but he’s been a comfortably above-average player for a long time.

Defensively, Suzuki is a profile right fielder with a rocket arm (he pitched in high school) and good range. He has good speed and has played center field here and there, though he fits best in right long-term. Suzuki is nothing to write home about on the bases despite a few 15+ stolen base seasons. He’s bat first, a right field arm second, and everything else third.

Two years ago Shogo Akiyama (three years, $21M with Reds) and Yoshi Tsutsugo (two years, $12M with Rays) came over from Japan, and both have been flops. Akiyama signed at 31, however, and is more of a speed and defense guy. Tsutsugo signed at 27 and had big power numbers in Japan, but also struck out 25.3% of the time his last year there.

The No. 1 question with any hitter coming over from Japan (or Korea) is whether he can handle Major League velocity. The average fastball in Japan is a few ticks below the big leagues -- it’s not uncommon to see a guy sitting 88 mph and having success over there -- and some hitters have struggled with it. Akiyama in particular has been overmatched by fastballs since arriving.

That said, Suzuki’s performance dwarfs Akiyama’s in Japan, and he put up comparable power numbers to Tsutsugo while striking out considerably less. Ohtani has a big uppercut swing and hasn’t had trouble with velocity since joining the Angels. Suzuki is said to have a more level line drive swing (kinda like Matsui). Ultimately, we don’t know how he’ll fare until he gets over here.

What will it cost?

A 27-year-old Pollock would be a $100M+ player on the free agent market. Suzuki won't get $100M+, however. The uncertainty regarding his performance going forward will be baked into the contract, so maybe something like Nick Castellanos and Marcell Ozuna money (both four years and $64M) works better? That’s $16M a year from ages 27-30 and a little more than 31-year-old Pollock received three years ago (four years and $55M).

The Cubs gave Kosuke Fukudome four years and $48M way back in 2007. Like Suzuki, he was regarded as the best position player in Japan when he came over. Unlike Suzuki, he signed his contract at age 30. Fukudome didn’t work out here, but it only takes one team to jump out and offer a big deal. Four years and $64M doesn’t seem crazy to me.

How does the posting system work?

Suzuki does not have enough service time to qualify for international free agency, so he has to be posted, and the posting system is essentially free agency with a tax. He can negotiate with any team, and the team that signs him will pay Hiroshima a “release fee” based on the contract size. Here’s the release fee breakdown:

• Contract worth $25M or less: 20% of total guarantee
• Contract worth $25M to $50M: $5 million plus 17.5% of amount over $25 million
• Contract worth $50M+: $9.375 million plus 15% of amount over $50 million

My hypothetical four-year, $64M contract would come with an $11.475M posting fee ($9.375M plus 15% of the $14M over $50), so the total investment would be $75.475M. The posting fee does not count against the luxury tax. Only the contract is luxury tax eligible.

The posting window is Nov. 1st to Dec. 5th, and once posted, the player has 30 days to sign a contract. The Japan Series can end as late as Nov. 15th (the league took a two-week break so players could participate in the Olympics this summer, hence the late finish), so it’ll be a while until Suzuki is actually posted. I wonder how it’ll work with the Collective Bargaining Agreement set to expire Dec. 1st?

How would he fit?

The Yankees already have a pretty awesome right-handed power hitter with a rocket arm in right field. There are three outfield positions though, and Aaron Judge is set to become a free agent next offseason. You don’t have to try too hard to see a scenario in which the Yankees trade Joey Gallo, put Suzuki in left in 2022, then let Judge walk and move Suzuki to right in 2023.

But yeah, the fit is imperfect. The Yankees have given no indication they’re going to trade Gallo despite cries from a segment of the fan base (Gallo is really good! flawed, but good!), and although Brian Cashman specifically mentioned center field as a position the team will evaluate this offseason, Suzuki won’t help there. All signs point to him being a corner outfielder moving forward.

I suppose the Yankees could put Gallo in center field for a year and plop Suzuki in left. Gallo is gifted enough defensively to man center and he’s played there throughout his career, including 38 games in 2019. Surely he could handle a full season in center in his age 28 season in 2022, right? The Yankees have resisted using Gallo in center, so this doesn’t seem realistic.

Suzuki is the right man at the wrong time. He would have made much more sense as a target next offseason, when Gallo and Judge are scheduled to become free agents. As things stand, the Yankees would have to trade Gallo or Judge (or Giancarlo Stanton, I guess) to make room for Suzuki, and that just doesn’t seem like a thing that is all that likely to happen.

The position player priorities this offseason are shortstop (gap) first base (gap) then I guess catcher and center field. Corner outfield is pretty far down the list. The Yankees will (and should) focus their time and resources on those other positions. If something comes along that makes sense in an outfield corner, they’ll consider it, but it’s not a priority. A Suzuki pursuit is unlikely.

3. Rapid fire thoughts. The Padres have their new manager: Bob Melvin, according to multiple reports. The Athletics had to give San Diego permission to interview Melvin because he was under contract, and there’s reportedly no compensation heading to Oakland. The compensation is not having to pay him. I highlighted Melvin as a managerial candidate a few weeks ago and I am extremely mad the Yankees signed up for another three years of Aaron Boone when Melvin was apparently available. The A’s denied the Yankees permission to interview him four years ago, so it’s not like he was never on their radar. Did they not ask for permission this time around? Were they dead set on retaining Boone? Whatever happened, I hate it. Melvin is on the short list of the game’s best managers and Boone is … not. Not a great start to the offseason, folks. As for the Athletics, they are essentially waging war against their fan base between this and raising ticket prices despite drawing fewer than 10,000 fans a game in September. They are trying to tank attendance to show they need a new ballpark and/or justify relocation. It really sucks. The Melvin move is a clear cost-cutting thing, so I imagine the A’s best players (Matt Chapman, Sean Manaea, Matt Olson, etc.) will hit the trade market soon. I look forward to the Yankees again retaining their own mediocrity rather than acquiring an upgrade from the Athletics (in all seriousness, if the Athletics are prioritizing cost-cutting over sound baseball decisions, the Yankees need to be all over that) … And finally, the Gold Glove finalists were announced yesterday. Aaron Judge is not among them and he was the Yankees’ only real shot at a Gold Glove. Joey Gallo is a finalist in right field, though that’s for his work with the Rangers. Gallo is a Gold Glove finalist in right field and a Silver Slugger finalist at DH. This sport is so dumb sometimes.

Mailbag Questions of the Week

Dan asks: Do you agree with the argument that the postseason is a crapshoot, or do you think that some teams actually are better built to go deep into October, even if they have identical regular season success?

There is always going to be some level of luck or randomness or crapshootiness or whatever you want to call it in the postseason (and in baseball in general). Sometimes Eddie Rosario is going to get 14 hits in a six-game span and sometimes Jeffrey Maier is going to stick out his glove. You can’t predict that stuff. You just have to hope things break your way.

That said, of course I think some teams are built better for a deep October run than others. The Astros are in the ALCS every year and they’re in the World Series for the third time in five years. The Dodgers have three pennants and five NLCS appearances in the last six years. I don’t think you crapshoot your way into that much consistent postseason success.

I wrote about Houston’s high contact offense earlier this week, and yes, they’re cheaters, but the high contact offense seems to have heightened value in October, when you see the other’s best pitchers so much. Homers are important too. Fewer runs are scored in October but the home run rate stays roughly the same as the regular season, so dingers take on added importance*.

* Sarah Langs notes 49.5% of runs have scored on home runs this postseason. It was 42.7% during the regular season. So yeah, homers are extra important in October.

Obviously good pitching is a must too, though there’s a difference between a great postseason pitching staff and a great regular season pitching staff. Off-days in the postseason allow teams to really lean on their top arms. I mean really lean on them. Look at the percent of postseason innings thrown by each World Series winner’s top six pitchers the last few years:

• 2020 Dodgers: 68.5% (no off-days in the LDS and LCS)
• 2019 Nationals: 83.4%
• 2018 Red Sox: 75.4%
• 2017 Astros: 80.9%
• 2016 Cubs: 81.5%

To be clear, I’m defining “top six pitchers” as the six pitchers who threw the most innings in the postseason, not necessarily the six best by ERA or FIP or WAR or whatever. Just the six guys the team leaned on the most (I’m trusting the managers to sort out who their six best arms are, basically). Aside from last year, the weird pandemic year, recent World Series champs used their top six pitchers to cover about 80% of their innings in October. That’s crazy!

You can’t run a pitching staff like that in the regular season (the top six Yankees threw 52.8% of their innings in 2021). You need that 13-man (really more like 20-25-man) depth during the long season. In October, off-days allow you to shrink your staff and lean on your top guys. That’s why an overall mediocre pitching staff like, say, the 2021 Red Sox, can make a reasonably deep postseason run. They avoid the mediocre pitchers who made them mediocre.

Defense is important, baserunning is important, and a manager who knows how to best use his roster and put his players in a position to succeed is important in the postseason too. Mostly though, hitters who make a lot of quality contact and having 6-7 top flight arms you can lean on seems to be a recipe for success in October. Not necessarily the recipe, but a recipe. (Having 6-7 top arms is one thing. Keeping them healthy and effective is another.)

I also think there’s a conversation to be had about whether teams built around interchangeable complementary players (Athletics, Brewers, Rays, etc.) can have success in the postseason. Even last year’s Rays needed a historic performance from Randy Arozarena to narrowly beat the Yankees and narrowly beat the Astros before getting pantsed by the Dodgers.

Star-level performances rule the day in October. You can get those star-level performances from anyone if they get hot at the right time (like Eddie Rosario this postseason), but the more stars you have, the more likely you are to get that star-level performance. I guess that’s just a long way of saying you need great players to win a title. Good players probably won’t cut it.

The smaller the sample, the more randomness can be a factor, and the postseason isn’t much more than a string of small sample series. But to think it’s all a crapshoot? No. The best team may not win but the best team has a better chance to win. I firmly believe there are certain skills conducive to postseason success, and you can build a team accordingly.

James asks: The rotation is going to get less attention than the position players this off-season, but with the high amount of injury and performance uncertainty behind Cole is there any potential for a reunion with Tanaka? I seem to recall the way he talked about signing in Japan didn’t rule out a return. How did his NPB season go? And what is his contract status?

Tanaka’s been great this year. He missed the first few weeks of the season with a calf injury but has stayed healthy since, and has a 3.01 ERA in 23 starts and 155.2 innings (I believe he still has one more regular season start remaining). His peripherals are positively Tanaka-esque:

• Strikeout rate: 20.2% (NPB average: 19.7%)
• Walk rate: 4.6% (NPB average: 8.9%)
• Home run rate: 0.98 HR/9 (NPB average: 0.84 HR/9)

That is as Tanaka as it gets. League average strikeout rate, way better than average walk rate, and a below average home run rate. That’s the guy we watched the last 5-6 years of his MLB career. Tanaka turns 33 next week. He should still have a few more good years in him.

"When I became a free agent, honestly, I wanted to sign another contract with the Yankees and play there," Tanaka told Jason Coskrey during his re-introductory press conference with the Rakuten Golden Eagles. "Then, as I heard different things, I thought I might have to take a different road and considered various things."

Tanaka signed a two-year deal worth $8.6M per season (he is the highest paid player in Japan this season) and the deal reportedly includes an opt-out so he can pursue MLB opportunities this offseason. How seriously he’ll pursue those opportunities, I don’t know. Tanaka didn’t return to Rakuten until late January last winter. Not sure he wants to go through that again (especially with the Collective Bargaining Agreement expiring).

I can’t find it now but I remember reading somewhere that the Yankees were concerned about Tanaka’s stuff declining in 2020, which is why they let him walk. His signature splitter deserted him in 2019 and he spent his last two years with the Yankees essentially getting by on smarts. Tanaka threw a ton of sliders, had a show-me 91-92 mph fastball, and the split came and went.

If that's true about his stuff declining, then it’s hard to see the Yankees circling back a year later. Tanaka’s another year older, there’s more mileage on his arm, etc. I think the Yankees said thank you for the seven years and closed the book on Tanaka last winter. Great Yankee, but better to let him go a year too early rather than a year too late. I look forward to seeing him at Old Timers’ Day one day.

(There was a report Tanaka returned to Japan in part because of anti-Asian racism, though apparently that story was lost in translation. It was an opinion column in a Japanese tabloid speculating why Tanaka may have returned to Japan, not reporting it as a fact.)

Ben asks: Help - I've convinced myself that trading Jonathan Loaisiga is a good idea. The Yankees have been burned by hanging onto too many players after a strong debut (Andujar, Frazier, Gary, Gleyber, Voit), and Loaisiga's injury history would make selling high prudent. Am I crazy to think he could headline a package for a premium player (Bryan Reynolds, Ketel Marte, J-Ram, Matt Olson, Cronenworth)? If a deal of that sort is on the table, you'd have to at least consider it. Hypothetically, I trust Cashman to rebuild a strong bullpen.

Trading Loaisiga is not crazy. I advocated trading him (and Chad Green) in July. I understood it wasn’t going to happen, but I thought it should have at the time. My reasons:

• The Yankees were oppressively mediocre. Man did I not enjoy this team. The 2021 Yankees were my least favorite Yankees team in quite some time.
• High-reliever relievers with multiple years of control are usually in demand at the trade deadline, and there’s always a desperate contender willing to pay.
• The Yankees are good at building bullpens and I was confident they would be able to replace Green and Loaisiga. If not at the deadline, then at least going into 2022.

Knowing what we know now, I was kinda right? The Yankees made all those moves at the deadline and got better (.513 winning percentage before deadline and .622 after), but Loaisiga and Green were only small parts of that success. Green got dingeritis and moved down the pecking order and Loaisiga missed just about all of September with his shoulder injury. The Yankees could have traded them and not been too much worse.

Anyway, trading Loaisiga is not crazy. He has a very long and very scary injury history (and it’s all arm injuries too), and his trade value is never going to be greater. Loaisiga had a fantastic season and he has three full years of team control remaining. The longer you wait to trade him, the more likely it is he suffers a catastrophic injury, and the less team control he has when you do trade him, reducing his value. This is the time to cash in.

Of course, the Yankees shouldn’t trade Loaisiga for the sake of trading him. You’d have to get a pretty good haul, and I’m thinking something along the lines of the Andrew Miller trade. Two top prospects plus other pieces. The Miller trade hasn’t worked out all that great, but that’s the framework. Three postseason runs of an elite reliever for two top prospects, plus more.

If the Yankees can get a package like that, then yes, trade Loaisiga and go replace him with the next Clay Holmes (much easier said than done, I know). I don’t think Loaisiga can be the No. 1 piece in a trade package for one of the players Ben mentioned though: Jake Cronenworth, Ketel Marte, Matt Olson, Jose Ramirez, and Bryan Reynolds. That’s too ambitious.

Loaisiga could be part of a package to get one of those guys, but I don’t think any of those five teams is taking a reliever -- an incredible reliever, but still a reliever -- as the headliner in a trade. Your best hope is the Padres because they’re clearly going for it, so they might pay a premium for a top flight reliever. Even then, the Yankees would have to kick in a lot more with Loaisiga to get a guy like Cronenworth, who is good and has four years of control.

The Diamondbacks (Marte) and Pirates (Reynolds) are rebuilding and won’t trade their best player for a package fronted by a reliever. When the Athletics trade their best players (Josh Donaldson, Tim Hudson, Mark Mulder, etc.), they always trade them for prospects and pre-arbitration players. Loaisiga is not really up their alley, though I’m sure they’d listen.

To answer the question, yes, I think Ben is crazy for thinking Loaisiga could front a package for one of those star position players. He could be part of a package, sure, but I can’t imagine any of those teams would trade those players for a reliever (plus other stuff). It doesn’t fit. The Yankees shouldn’t trade Loaisiga just to trade him, they’d have to get a great return, but a reliever with an injury history should never be off-limits.

Steve asks: If all relievers are failed starters, who in the Yankees system (or free agents) have potential to be high leverage relievers going forward? Would it be smart to try to trade guys in the current bullpen (Green, Peralta, Chapman) and rebuild the bullpen with guys you’ve listed?

Not all relievers are failed starters! Most are, but more and more pitchers are being developed solely as relievers. They did a segment on this on Effectively Wild recently. Here’s their data. The number fluctuates from year to year, but roughly 30% of big league relievers these days never worked as a starting pitcher in the minors. 20 years ago it was around 14%.

(The Yankees don’t have anyone on their roster who’s been a career reliever. They were all starters at some point, at least in the minors, including Lucas Luetge and Wandy Peralta. Craig Kimbrel is the most prominent career reliever in the game right now.)

As for the question, five starting pitching prospects jump to mind as potential high leverage relievers: Luis Gil, Luis Medina, Clarke Schmidt, Randy Vasquez, and Ken Waldichuk. The pre-2021 version of Deivi Garcia projects as a starter because he has a deep arsenal with control, and Hayden Wesneski has five pitches and pitching smarts. He’s a potential starter.

Generally speaking, starters who wind up in the bullpen do so because they have a severe weakness. Zack Britton and Chad Green are in the bullpen because they don’t have a reliable secondary pitch. Dellin Betances and Aroldis Chapman are in the bullpen because their control is poor. Jonathan Loaisiga has a long injury history. So on and so forth.

Gil, Medina, and Vasquez are huge stuff guys with iffy control. Iffy enough that going through a lineup multiple times may not be possible despite having the requisite three pitches. Schmidt is similar. His command isn’t great, and we’re at the point now where we shouldn’t expect him to stay healthy as a starter. His elbow keeps telling us nope, I don’t like this.

Waldichuk’s an interesting one because of his invisiball. He racks up a ton of strikeouts with a fastball that is very difficult to track, but the rest of the package is just okay. His breaking ball isn’t great, his control isn’t great, etc. Waldichuk may wind up in the bullpen as a fastball-heavy guy a la Green. He’s a fascinating prospect, though I’m not sure whether he can start long-term.

Schmidt is the only one of the five pitchers I mentioned who I would put in the bullpen right now. He turns 26 in February and he’s been unable to stay healthy as a starter, so shift him to the bullpen and let him air it out in one or two-inning bursts. The other guys are still young enough to keep trying to develop them as starters (Waldichuk is the oldest, he turns 24 in January).

I’m pretty confident in the Yankees’ ability to build quality bullpens, either by going outside the organization or calling someone up from the system. Like I said about Loaisiga earlier, you can’t trade these guys just because, but dealing from a strength (bullpen) to improve a weakness (everything else) is smart business. Trading relievers has to be on the table.

Michael asks: I'm not a Gallo fan, but I also don't expect him to be traded. If Rizzo leaves and the Yankees move on from Voit, how about Gallo at 1B, perhaps opening up LF for another LH'd bat? I believe it was Odor who said Gallo was the best defensive 1B'man in the league the games he played there for Texas. A good defensive 1B'man who can also provide quality back up to the corner OF positions doesn't seem all that bad, no?

Eh, I’m not sure I’d trust a teammate with something like this. They’re always going to talk up their buddies. Joey Gallo has played only 745.1 innings at first base in the big leagues (+0 DRS and -4 OAA) and none since 2018. I think he’s way too good of an outfielder to put him at first base. Gallo has been a full-time outfielder since 2019. His ranks:

• DRS: +32 (4th, right behind Aaron Judge)
• UZR: +12.0 (11th)
• OAA: +10 (26th)

Gallo is a top 25 defensive outfielder, maybe even top 10 depending which stats you prefer. Also, he’s said he prefers the outfield -- “The outfield is my true position. I’m kind of finding that out now, that my tools play way better in the outfield,” he told Jeff Wilson in 2019 -- and that matters. You have to listen to a guy when he tells you where he’s comfortable.

Would Gallo play first base if the Yankees needed him at first base? I’m sure he would. But he prefers the outfield and the defensive numbers say that’s where he belongs. Left field in Yankee Stadium is the biggest part of the outfield and you need a good defender out there, and he fits. To me, Gallo at first is a waste of his defense. I wouldn’t consider him there full-time.

Mark asks: How about Brandon Belt this offseason? Do you buy the 2020-21 power surge? Is he a candidate to abuse the right-field fence? What's his defense like?

The Giants unexpectedly won 107 games this season because so many of their veterans didn’t just have turn back the clock seasons, they had their best seasons ever. Brandon Crawford had his best season. Buster Posey had his best season since his MVP year. Evan Longoria had his best season since he was with Tampa. So on and so forth.

Belt, 34 in April, had his best non-COVID season this year, hitting .274/.378/.597 (158 wRC+) with 29 homers in 381 plate appearances. He’s missed a lot of time with injuries over the years and this year it was an oblique strain, knee inflammation, and a broken thumb. The thumb was bad luck. He tried to bunt against the shift and got hit by a pitch. It happens.

When healthy, Belt is usually very good, he just isn’t healthy often. He’s played only 520 of 708 possible games since 2017, or 73%, and the injuries have been a little of everything. It’s not one chronic issue. Belt is a classic first base thumper with exit velocity and strikeouts (27.0%) and walks (12.6%), and he’s a good defender according to the numbers and the eye test.

Belt is a lefty hitter and not a dead pull guy. When he pulls the ball, he either rolls over on a grounder or launches it for a homer. Otherwise he stays up the middle or goes to left field, which has allowed him to keep his batting average relatively high. His 2021 spray chart:

In that sense, Belt might not be the best fit for Yankee Stadium, because when he pulls the ball for power, it’s usually going out anyway. He doesn’t hit all that many fly balls to right field. That doesn’t mean we should cross Belt off the list. He’s still a really good hitter. It just means he’s not the type of lefty hitter who would get an immediate boost from the short porch.

Brian Cashman admitted the Yankees need to cut down on strikeouts and Belt wouldn’t help do that. He’s not an extremely high strikeout guy like Joey Gallo, but he’s in that 27.0% range with Aaron Judge, Giancarlo Stanton, Gary Sanchez, etc. As good as Belt is, adding that guy to this lineup doesn’t solve the strikeout issue, which again, Cashman definitively said is an issue.

There’s also this: Belt’s getting a qualifying offer. He has to, right? I imagine the Giants would happily take him back on a one-year, $18.4M contract. My guess is they’ll sign him to a two or three-year extension like Crawford (and probably Posey too), but the offseason is coming, and they’ll slap the qualifying offer on him if they’re unable to work something out in time.

Belt declining the qualifying offer means he would cost a draft pick and international bonus pool money to sign, and indicate he’s looking for a pretty good payday. I’m not sure the Yankees will go into the $18M+ a year range for anyone other than a premier shortstop this offseason, and I’m not even sold on that. (Belt could take a lower annual salary across more years, I guess.)

Belt is a good player who, in a vacuum, would make the Yankees better. On the field, he would only exacerbate the Yankees’ strikeout problem, plus he is a soon-to-be 34-year-old with a long injury history who would cost a draft pick. I like the player but I don’t like the fit with the 2022 Yankees. I say look elsewhere for a first baseman this offseason.

Adam asks: If the Yankees end up signing an inexpensive stopgap shortstop, who would you want among the Free Agent and likely trade options (Villar, DeJong, Simmons, Galvis, Iglesias, etc.).

I’ve had Paul DeJong on my list of potential trade targets to write up the last few weeks thinking it was a clever idea and a player not really on anyone’s radar, then Adam sent in a question about him and MLBTR wrote an entire post about him as a trade candidate. I guess it wasn’t as clever as I thought.

Anyway, my answer was going to be Miguel Rojas. Then the Marlins gave him a two-year extension worth $10M earlier this week, so that’s off the table. Rojas had one year at $5.5M remaining on his contract and is a good at everything, great at nothing type who plays with a chip on his shoulder. I would have preferred him to the free agent stopgaps.

Here are the free agent stopgap shortstops by projected 2022 WAR:

1. Andrelton Simmons: +1.5 WAR
2. Freddy Galvis: +1.0 WAR
3. Jonathan Villar: +1.0 WAR
4. Jose Iglesias: +0.0 WAR

Villar hasn’t played much shortstop the last two years (and has rated poorly defensively when he has played short), so I don’t view him as a viable shortstop option. He’s a second or third baseman at this point, and besides, there are already rumblings the Mets want him back. Not sure he’s a realistic option.

I want no part of Simmons. He’s been one of the worst hitters in baseball the last three years (.250/.302/.323 and 70 wRC+ in his last 1,000 plate appearances) and his defense has slipped from historically great to about average. It’s been about four years since Simmons was the all-world defender a few too many people seem to believe he still is. Hardest of passes for me.

I would go with Galvis over Iglesias, though I’m not really dug in on this and would be equally unenthused with either. They both still rate as quality defenders and have better than average strikeout rates, though Galvis will pop 15+ homers. Iglesias’ offensive value is tied up entirely in BABIP. No power, no walks, no baserunning, all singles and BABIP. It’s uncanny:

When Iglesias has a .300-ish BABIP, he’s a 90 wRC+ hitter or so, and that has been the case in the last three 162-game seasons. I’d rather not bank on the ebbs and flows of BABIP, so I prefer Galvis’ more predictable power output than Iglesias’ more volatile offense. We’re splitting hairs here though. Neither guy is a good hitter.

The Phillies would probably give Didi Gregorius and the $14M remaining on his contract away. He was horrible this season, one of the worst players in baseball, and while Sir Didi is forever cool with me, I don’t want the 2022 version. You could probably get Nick Ahmed in a salary dump at this point. The Diamondbacks owe him $17.5M over the next two years.

DeJong will get a longer post soon and I prefer him to the other shortstop trade candidates now that Rojas has signed an extension. He’s a legitimately great defender, he still has power even though his overall offense has slipped, and he has two more guaranteed years with a reasonable $4.3M luxury tax remaining on his contract. You will have to trade legit prospects to get him though. Not top prospects, but actual prospects.

So, based on all that, my stopgap shortstop preference list goes DeJong (gap) Galvis or Iglesias (gap) everyone else. I think one of the big name shortstops is going to get squeezed into a one-year deal and that may be the way the Yankees go. But when you’re the Yankees and you have an opening at a premium position, and there are two franchise caliber players at that position sitting in free agency, open the wallet.

Seth asks: This is a very minor thing that has always bothered me with official scoring. Why is a sacrifice (bunt or fly) not counted as an out for a hitter towards their batting average when there physically is an out recorded but an error counts as an out for a hitter when there isn't an out recorded. I'm sure the main reason is "this is the way things always have been" but it doesn't make much sense to me. I was curious what you think.

From MLB’s official site: “A sacrifice fly does not count as an at-bat and therefore does not count against a player's batting average. The thinking behind the rule is that with a man on third base and fewer than two outs, a batter will often intentionally try to hit a fly ball, sacrificing his time at bat to help score a run. However, sacrifice flies count against a player's on-base percentage.”

If you gave every hitter a truth serum, how many do you think would say they regularly try to hit a sac fly intentionally? I think it’s less than 10%. I think the vast majority go up there trying to hit the ball hard in the air somewhere so they can get a hit and continue the rally, and if they have to settle for a sac fly, so be it. I’ve always felt sac flies were a Plan B to getting a hit.

Maybe this is just semantics. Is there really any difference between “try to hit the ball hard in the air somewhere” and “intentionally hit a sac fly?” I guess not. Either way, I think a sac fly should count as an at-bat because the at-bat was an opportunity to get a hit, and you did not get a hit. Same with sac bunts. This seems very cut and dried.

There were only 1,143 sac flies this year. The league leader had 12 (Yuli Gurriel and Whit Merrifield tied). Count sac flies as an at-bat and league batting average drops from .244 to .242. Not that big a drop at all. So maybe we shouldn’t sweat counting them as an at-bat? It’s not like they move the needle much on batting average. Eh, whatever. Weird baseball rules, man.

(Send your requests for Tuesday's random Yankee series and questions for Friday's mailbag to RABmailbag at gmail dot com.)