Blog Suggests Yanks Should Have Played Grisham Over Verdugo

Boom. Here’s the thing—the Yankees, supposedly darlings of modern baseball analytics, are suggested to have botch a decision that probably could’ve been solved with a napkin and a Sharpie. This is the same franchise that’s touted as a pioneer in data-driven player development, yet they couldn’t run the numbers to see Grisham—yes, the same guy who posted 10.1 WAR from 2020 to 2023—was likely to offer more value than Verdugo, who clocked in at a decent but clearly lesser 8.0 WAR in that same span.

And no, we’re not just box score watching. Verdugo was supposed to be the “contact guy.” Low strikeouts, decent OBP, solid glove. But after a hot April last year, he turned into a pumpkin. He never OPS’ed above .687 in any month post-April. Not once. You know how hard that is to do when you’re playing every day in Yankee Stadium?

 
Meanwhile, Trent Grisham, the power-speed Gold Glover with untapped offensive upside, was collecting splinters on the bench—and a cool $5.5 million—for doing nothing. Not because he wasn’t good enough, but because the Yankees never gave him a real chance. Imagine paying someone that much to not help your team.

Fast forward. Grisham is finally getting reps in the Bronx, and surprise: he’s raking. Hitting .320 with 6 bombs and a 1.093 OPS, all while playing his usual solid defense. This isn’t just a hot streak. It’s a giant, flashing sign reading: “Hey, I should’ve been out there last year.”

And as for Verdugo? Well, he’s now with the Braves and hitting .341 with an .850 OPS in his first 10 games. So yeah—good for him. But that’s not really the point, is it?

The real kicker here is the irony. The Yankees—the self-proclaimed kings of baseball analytics—somehow managed to miss this obvious call. Depending on who you ask, they either have one of the most advanced analytical systems in the league or one of the smallest staffs in the AL East. Either way, someone’s not reading the right spreadsheets.

Michael Fishman, the man at the helm of the Yankees’ analytics department, has been praised in some circles. But if this is the output—players like Grisham buried while underperformers are force-fed opportunities—then we’ve got to ask: are these really the right analytics? Or just a really fancy way of justifying bad decisions?

Aaron Judge, ever the diplomat, offered a telling quote after the 2023 letdown:

“I think it’s about funneling [the numbers] down to the players in the right format… I think maybe we might be looking at the wrong ones.”

Now Judge is being polite, but let’s call it what it is. The players don’t pick the numbers—they’re given the numbers, instructed by the analytics team. So if the Yankees are looking at the wrong ones, it’s not a player issue—it’s a leadership issue. And this Grisham-Verdugo mix-up is just another shining example.

It’s honestly baffling. Outsiders, fans, blogs like Yanks Go Yard, us here at BYB, we all see the problems clear as day. Yet the folks inside the organization—the ones getting paid to see them—are the ones missing the forest for the trees.

At some point, something’s got to give. Until then, we’re stuck watching talented players bloom after leaving New York or only when injuries force their hand. It’s the ongoing saga of the Boone era: great potential, questionable choices, and a whole lot of missed opportunities.

Yanks Go Yard nailed this one. The irony stings, but the truth? It’s sharper than ever.