Yankees sign David Aardsma

14 thoughts on “Yankees sign David Aardsma

  1. williamjtasker

    Yay! Another candidate for the "who will replace Mariano Rivera in 2013" sweepstakes! That's all we need.

  2. Closer by committee, anyone?
    (No thanks)

  3. not Montero's dad

    Guy who walks too many guys but has a good arm. Not horrible. Low risk. Girardi has bene able to get production out of mediocre relievers (Jose Veras and Edwar Ramirez come to mind), and Aardsma is better than they are. Maybe he turns into something for the big club or as part of a trade. Not a terrible move.

  4. I really like this move. Another low risk option who could provide serious upside. The "heir to Mo" meme is too premature, of course, and we will certainly tire of it soon enough.

  5. Eli

    Like the Chavez signing, I dont see the point.

    • BrienJackson

      Joba gets a rehab buddy for the spring?

  6. Mike

    He's still the 4th option at best next year (after D-Rob, Soriano, and Joba). Career 9 K/9 but 5 BB/9. D-Rob was 4.7 BB/9 but you can get away with it when you have 13.5 K/9. Also I always felt like Aardsma does (or did, at least) throw hard (95 mph FB), but it seemed like it was straight and very easy to pick up for the batter. Anyhow it might be a somewhat useful move for next year if they didn't spend too much.

    • jay_robertson

      Although – he could well be the 2nd option, after D-Rob. If Soriano doesn't suck again, I can see him at least trying to opt out – if he doesn't try to bail, it will likely be because he has another year like 2011. On the other hand – while I would absolutely love Joba to be Joba, circa 2007 (2008?) – I sure wouldn't want to have him down in stone as our next best option for closer – or even 8th inning guy.

      Cheap insurance. In the world of Yankee budgets, cheap insurance.

  7. Hugh

    I always like a move like this. It makes me appreciate that the guys who get paid to look at the big picture and plan for the future are doing their jobs. Might work out or might not, but a fairly high-ceiling move with limited downside (supposing the contract is not for megabucks, which may be no sure thing, I guess), no?

    • BrienJackson

      I don't see how this could be called a high-ceiling move at all. In the best case scenario, Aardsma is likely to be a middling reliever, while in the worst case scenario he won't get healthy and the Yankees will pay him for nothing.

      • Hugh

        For the reasons mcmastro and VT state below, I disagree with you, Brien. Let's say the ceiling is higher than the floor is low. Again, presupposing they are not paying a lot for him.

        • BrienJackson

          Well the realistic floor is Aardsma not getting healthy/regaining effectiveness and giving the Yankees literally nothing (or worse than nothing, I suppose). I'm not sure how the realistic ceiling could be higher than that.

          To be clear, I don't hate the move, I just don't see the point of it. It's a very strange gamble for a major league deal (which means the Yankees will have to pay him at least the big league minimum this year, and won't be able to send him away with a $100k thank you very much) when you're a team with as deep of a bullpen as the Yankees have right now.

  8. mcmastro

    Considering the Yankees got Chavez, Raul Ibanez, Russell Branyan and David Aardsma for just around 3 million, i don't really see the downside of any of these moves. If any of them pan out, it'll cover the cost for any of the other "mistakes".

  9. VT Yankee Fan

    Well, it is what it is – a low risk, medium potential reward, insurance move. He did save 69 games over 2 seasons, so for 2013 the Yankees potentially have 2 guys who have proven themselves in closer roles (Aa and Sori) along with DRob and Joba. And who knows if Feliciano will ever take a mound again.

Comments are closed.