Eric Chavez Debating Retirement: Why the Yankees Could Use Him Another Year
According to Jerry Crasnick of ESPN, Eric Chavez is still debating whether or not he will decide to call it a career after 13 seasons in the Major Leagues. At some point during the winter, he will make a decision about his future, and his agent sees a return to the Yankees as a fit if he elects to return for one more season.
Chavez signed with the Yankees last winter and played the role of designated hitter and third baseman off the bench through out the season.
Among the different targets that Brian Cashman hopes to hit this winter is finalizing the look of his bench. Andruw Jones and Eric Chavez were designated hitters when players like Alex Rodriguez were on the disabled list for an extended period of time. Chavez was able to man third base in the absence of Rodriguez.
The former Gold Glove award winner would take the field when the Yankees coaching staff felt that he wasn't going to break; after all, he has been very injury prone later on in his career. In 2011, he went up to the plate 160 times and hit .263. That is the most plate appearances he has seen since 2007. The same goes for his production, as he drove in 26 runs, which is a bit more than half of his 46 RBI's in 2007.
The main thing to note about the RBI's is the fact that he was clutch when the Yankees needed him and posted a .416 batting average with runners in scoring position. If he sees a bit more playing time in 2012, he could match that production or even go beyond it.
Chavez made $1.5 million with the Yankees in 2011, which means if he decides to come back for another year, the Yankees could match that salary and not have so much risk. Injury is the only risk that would ever come with Chavez, but with the proper attention like that of which he saw this year, he will be fine. The Yankees don;t have much to lose when it comes to giving Eric Chavez another chance.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?