Good afternoon everyone, it's time to dive back into the mailbag and answer some of your questions. Remember to send in your questions for our bi-weekly call by e-mail to pinstripealleyblog [at] gmail [dot] com.
Craig Z. asks: It would seem a qualifying offer to Bednar is a given. The QO to Jazz also seems likely as Yankees will perceive he will reject it and, unlike the gamble with Grisham that was a huge miscalculation on Cashman's part, Jazz will probably reject it. Your thoughts?
I don't know if I'd agree with your second point, as reports have come out saying that the team is actually unlikely to offer the qualifying offer to Jazz Chisholm Jr. this offseason. The gamble over whether Chisholm would accept the deal or not mirroring what happened with Trent Grisham last year is probably informing their decision on that matter, as while I wouldn't hate bringing Jazz back on a one-year deal the team seems to be angling towards allowing him to walk. Whereas Grisham was coming off of a career-best year, Chisholm had his worst season in pinstripes, but the argument could be made that Grisham knew the market was a lot more crowded with excellent choices while Chisholm is still one of the best options in a free agent field lacking a true superstar or even many stars to compete against.
With that in mind, it might be a more reasonable gamble to give Chisholm the QO and not lose him for nothing than it was with Grisham, but again the team clearly cares about their budget and potentially handing out over $45 million in 2027 salary between Bednar and Chisholm before free agency even opens might restrict them too much to make other moves. I'm not thrilled with the backup option to Chisholm being running Anthony Volpe at the keystone, but if it leads to improvements elsewhere on the roster I could see the logic in the move — and we'll talk about where that upgrade is most needed in a moment. Ultimately, while I know Chisholm had a disappointing year for New York (and perhaps set himself up to with talk of having a 50-50 season during spring), I think it's unlikely they field a better player at his position than him in 2027 and I think that makes the QO a worthwhile choice, but it looks like that won't be the case.
Anton H. asks: With Ryan McMahon struggling to solve the Yankees' third base problem as hoped, do you think the team will try to trade him this offseason, or is a DFA more likely? Given his $16 million salary for 2027, what teams, if any, could make a compelling case for acquiring him despite the financial commitment?
Now, here is where the resources need to be allocated to improve the position. Third base has been a black hole for damn near a decade at this point, with only small bursts of quality play like Gio Urshela's 2019 run sparkling before being swallowed back up by the void. Ryan McMahon was never expected to be a quality hitter when the Yankees acquired him, but they were certainly expecting better than the 78 wRC+ he posted in 124 games. He was also expected to overcome his offensive capabilities by providing stellar defense, and while he lived up to that in 2025 his play at the hot corner sizzled out completely in 2026 leading to a frustrating experience where he really didn't provide much of anything.
That's not really a compelling case to bring towards any potential suitors, so while the team would surely love to trade him away for whatever they could get, it would require tacking on prospects to get even partial salary relief at the moment. Normally I'd say they're better off just going the DFA route like they did with DJ LeMahieu and Aaron Hicks, but the team is also staring down the prospect of moving on from Giancarlo Stanton's contract as well and I'm not sure that Hal Steinbrenner could stomach two deadweight contracts for players not even on the team anymore. Of the two, it would be easier to sell McMahon with a prospect attached than it would Stanton, who has a full no-trade clause and an extra year on his deal even if it is a team option. If push comes to shove the team is better off moving on from McMahon and DFA'ing him would suffice, but if they can find an angle to move him that doesn't cost any of their blue chip prospects it wouldn't be a bad move to make — they can't all make it to the big leagues, and using prospect capital to improve the roster by subtraction is still an improvement. I trust the player development team to find enough talent to keep the pipeline greased up, and they didn't offload too much in this year's deadline.
jws85 asks: Assuming no additions during free agency, who would be the best leadoff hitter? Rice and Judge needs to be 2-4. Lombard, Bellinger, or Volpe could be options. Wells, García, Stanton, and Jones makes no sense.
If you're forcing me to keep Ben Rice and Aaron Judge somewhere in the 2-4 range then I'd set my sights on George Lombard Jr. earning the leadoff role, as the rookie showed solid results at the plate during his whirlwind debut in the second half and throughout the postseason. The defensive misplays were atypical of his performance down in the minors, but the bat showed some promise and the only other candidate I see would be Volpe, who has already had his chance to be a leadoff hitter to no avail. However, what I would rather do in this scenario is just have Rice hit leadoff, bat Judge second and have Bellinger flanking him with Lombard or Jones at cleanup and García hitting fifth. Rice proved that he's a capable enough table-setter, and without an ideal OBP-driven player in the lineup as is you might as well give your best hitters the earliest chances to get up to bat.
