Whattabout Bonds?

Bonds would have been my answer if the team came out of the break looking listless. Instead, they've come out looking like a playoff team. There's little doubt that Bonds would be poisonous to the clubhouse. If the team was already playing as if poisoned, it would be worth stirring things up to add Bonds' production. As it stands, I'd be reluctant to bring in a Bonds, preferring a quite contributor like Washburn or Bay. Bay would be far more expensive than Bonds (in talent, if not in dollars), but he'd also be a solution for 2009 and beyond, where as Bonds would be a two-month Band-Aid.

Short answer: by sweeping their way past two Wild Card contenders coming out of the break, the Yankees have earned the right not to have to deal with the circus Bonds would bring to town.

If there's one thing the Yankees have done well , it's handling guys with attitudes. Shawn Chacon was never as big of a issue here as he was in Colordo or Houston. Ponson was ran out of Texas on his attitude but he seem to have little problem here so far. I don't see why Bond's attitdue should be a serious problem.

In the end. Pittsburgh is asking for the moon for Nady or Bay. Nady espically makes no sense at all to trade serious prospects for.

I'd do Washburn for Igawa without much problem. Igawa's actually due more money on the contracts (though it's more spread out)

With Posada and Matsui out, if we don't get a OF/DH type we will be forced to play Brett Gardner or Justin Christian, this is on top of a Jose Molina and Melky Cabrera. not to meantion a slowly fading Bobby Abreu.

Either way. signing Bonds first also give us more leverage even if we want to deal for Bay. At the current situation it would appears that Bonds could be had for something like 1 Million or less. for that price and the production possibily involved. there's no real reason not to give it a shot. espically since this is a organization that always handled personal issues well.

thanks, Cliff, very nice job!--Pete A keeps insisting that we need a starter (when he's not chastising our guys for not scoring more)--hopefully he'll read this...

problem with Bay is if I recall correctly he's no fielder--or am I wrong? it'd be very nice to get an outfielder who we won't have to switch to dh (or wish we could)...

3 Thank you. It's nice to find a few people who are not on the 'Bonds is a cancer' bandwagon. Bonds has been basically out of baseball, blacklisted or not.

If we get Barry, as great as he was/is, he will not intimidate Derek, or Alex, or Jason, of Bobby, or many other of our vets. Our team can handle Bonds. And with all the legal problems and other shit that faces Bonds, I don't think he will have a terrible attitude in the clubhouse. My feeling is if he were signed, he would be extremely greatful and relieved.

His father was the next Willie Mays, and Barry actually beat Babe in many categories. The guy is walking baseball history.

And up until his last AB, Barry still had a great eye and great plate discipline. It is possible that Bonds might actually be a positive influence? That (especially) for Melky and Cano, that this guy has something to offer aside from his ABs (which would really be enough anyway).

Bonds has won just about everything in baseball... except a World Series. Think he might be motivated to help us win? As old and tired as his back is, he is a climb about kind of kind. Maybe if a 45 year old can have good ABs, so can Melky and Brett.

The truth is, even if he is still his crusty old asshole self, if he hits, we need him. But I believe he could have a very positive impact on the clubhouse. The guy has been unfairly scapegoated for doing exactly what hundreds of other players did. Think Jason hates Bonds because of his PEDs use?

Furtheremore, the Yankees would have the upper hand. A contract could be contigent on all kinds of 'Bonds Rules' to try keep a professional attitude in the clubhouse. Let him have his vibrating chair, but no other percs. No special treatment. Just the honor of wearing Pinstripes.

My only issue is it took Bonds a month or more to really get going last year, which he started in Spring Training. If may be too late to get him to a fully productive level... although one would think Bonds could still post an .850 OPS from a hospital bed.

However, with a low cost, incentive driven contract, there is little to lose. I mean if Papi WAS out for the year, the Sox picked Bonds up, and he helped them win, how would we feel. Would the 2008 Sox be dirty? I think not.

Reggie, the ultimate egotist, came into Thurman's house and proceded to rock the boat to the max. The clubhouse was divided into factions from day one. The clubhouse was close to fisticuffs on a daily basis. But Reggie helped the team to win. Sinlgehandedly won games. And how is he remembered... as the clubhouse cancer he was? No, as a hero. As a God. Retired number and all.

I was around in those days and remember how much I hated Reggie, who did honestly believe he was bigger then the team. If ARod did to Jeter what Reggie did to Thurm, I believe some fan would have shot him. But Reggie did indeed 'stir the drink', and in NY, winning is ultimately all that matters.

And lastly folks... at his very worst, when you talk about cancers, Bonds is simply a benign wart compared to worst cancer in modern day baseball... which back in the 80's was our very own George Steinbrenner. He is old and beloved now, but those of us around back then remember what an absolute monster George was. A team that survived 'The Boss' in his prime, can survive anything.

If we come close, but don't make the PS, I can safely say that signing Barry, BEFORE the ASB, would have made the difference. Signing Barry would have stopping a Sox repeat... might have given Moose and Giambi their rings.

As I said, it may be too late now... but it's still worth a try. Get Bay or Holliday too if we can. I guess it's a matter how how much we want to win.

But hey... this is a transition year. We are riddled with injuries. we have excuses NOT to win. I guess NOT winning is no big deal in this last year of Yankee Stadium. So we lose and the Red Sox win another WS. No big deal, right guys?

Right guys?

As much as I hate having Kei Igawa around, because I know Cashman will continue to try repeatedly with this lump, acquiring Jarrod Washburn violates my fairly non negotiable rule against acquiring mediocre pitchers. With the sole exception of 2005, Washburn has been so-so or worse since 2002. If the Yankees were desperate for pitching, or they needed to take him on in order to get someone else (Lidle) it's be okay, but I have no burning desire to see Jarrod Washburn for the next year and a half.

As for Bay, I'll always be poisoned by seeing him play in person and watching one of the most horrendous game long displays I've ever seen in Left Field at Yankee Stadium. He may have been having an off night, he may have improved, but that shitstorm will always affect my judgment of the man.

5 I'm not sure what you mean when you say that the team "survived" Steinbrenner in the 80's. You're certainly correct in the most technical sense; the franchise didn't go out of business and the team played every season, so I guess they did "survive." But he was a constantly destructive influence, creating turmoil and resentment which, at times, almost certainly affected the team's performance. Despite the 1985 team, that was a period of general decline leading to the 1990-91 debacle. Survived, yes, but barely.

I don't think the problem is that Bonds is a prick, it's also what he brings along with him. The media presence, bloated as it is now, is nothing compared with what it will be with Barry. I mean...look at the amount of attention he's getting already, and he's not even on the team. It will be all Bonds, all the time. You say that the veterans will be unaffected by that - but they didn't handle ARod's first couple of years in such a sanguine fashion.

Finally, of course, he hasn't faced a pitcher in ten months. He won't be getting those intentional walks anymore. I'd be surprised if he's worth the trouble.

Jorge should get over himself? Having season ending surgery is a very big decision for a professional athlete, so I think it is very unfair to suggest that arrogance or ego are playing a role in that decision. Besides, it seems as if Cashman and/or others in the organization think using Posada as a DH option would be beneficial to this year's team.

I also don't get the notion that Bonds would be poisonous. One gets the impression that he'd be going around the clubhouse spiking everyone's gatorade with cyanide or arsenic (maybe both). If the goal is to get an impact bat without giving up significant prospects than Bonds is the obvious answer. Bay is a very good player (although very much unsuited to playing the big LF at Yankee Stadium), but he is not a better hitter than Bonds, nor is he a better LF'er than Damon. If 2009 is the concern, I am sure Bay can be had (perhaps for cheaper) in the off season. Also, it could very well be that someone even better might come along. After all, guys like Hamilton and Quentin did change hands this past winter.

5 7 Back in the 1970s and 1980s, Steinbrenner may not have run the Yankees as smoothly as they are now, but he did help restore the team to an impressive championsip run from 1976 to 1981 (four pennants; 2 championships; five division titles). Also, as much as people seem to denigrate the 1980s, the team did win more games than any other in the decade and fielded good teams in 1983-1987. Was Steinbrenner perfect? No. Still, I prefer to look at his tenure on the whole and think it was a very good day when he took over. The Yankees have thrived under George...they survived CBS.

10 Yes, they won. But the method wasn't sustainable, and in the end it bit them in the ass. I'd rather put together the long, pinstriped line, then have to scurry around every year looking for the next FA fix, patching holes with mid-30s vets on high salaries. Has Steinbrenner been good for the Yankees? I think so, but it's easier to say that now, then when they had fallen so low they couldn't get Bonds or Maddux to sign as free agents - no matter how much money they offered.

I'd prefer not trading for Holliday or Bay, or anything really. Not at the expense of Hughes, Jackson, Montero, or even IPK - unless it's for a blue chip OF prospect that's ML-ready. If the Yankees fail to make the playoffs this year, so be it. They'll be that much stronger next season.

I absolutely agree they don't need a reliever... in fact they should probably try to sell Farnsworthless.

I mildly disagree about Washburn. I don't think he's much good, but I wouldn't go nuts if they got him (unless Vidro comes along).

The need for a bat is obvious. I've said enough about HE WHO MUST NOT BE SIGNED. Bay or Holliday are fine options, but I fear the price tags.

And Po should definitely have surgery.

Pretty much agree with everything you've said Cliff. The pen has been lights out lately, I see no reason for an aging, mediocre reliever just because he happens to be left handed. The pen has been the one true strength for most of the year.

Washburn I'm intrigued by. If we could do a straight swap of him for Igawa+(low) prospect+cash I'd be for it. Igawa just isn't going to be an effective pitcher here. Vidro though I want none of.

As for the other bat, I agree there's a need there but I worry about the price tags. If something like the Abreu salary dump trade from 2006 could be swung I'd be all for it. Are there any out there?

I've hashed through the Jorge stuff on previous threads, my opinion remains the same.

11 What method is sustainable? The parity of the 1980s showed that no way of doing business guaranteed much consistency. My point is that CBS allowed the team to rot and George quickly restored it to championship levels. Then, even though the team did not win in the 1980s, it remained pretty good. What's more, as the Yankees declined on the field in the early 1990s, George was busy ramping up the brand with many superb business decisions...all of which helped to build and sustain the glory days of today. Firing managers and spouting off to the media may not have been ideal, but on the whole, George was and is a great owner.

1 perfect slogan for t-shirts, bumperstickers, and billboards around NY, and wherever Major League Baseball is played.

8 word. Waiting a few more weeks to see if his bat can help isn't the end of the world.

Apparently the Bronx Banter is well represented by members of the American Board of Surgery. Drop the scalpels, people! Biology 101: Don't dissect the frogs until they're officially dead! Especially if the frog hits from both sides of the plate!

14 I'm not in the mood for this. George Steinbrenner is a great man.

~~They're a pitching-rich organization, and Cellophane Rasner and Groundhog Ponson can hold their own as fourth and fifth starters until the reinforcements are ready (which could include a healthy Chien-Ming Wang and Phil Hughes).~~

Cliff - what if Wang cannot come back this year, as many reports suggest that he won't have enough time to rehab, and, what if, when Hughes comes back, Phil pitches the same as he did earlier in the season?

It seems like a thin plan to be waiting on those two, for this year, if you ask me.

16 Not in the mood for an exchange of opinions on a blog? Sorry for addressing your post that was addressed to me. I didn't realize you weren't in the mood to have it taken seriously.

I say ARE YOU CRAZY to Washburn and Vidro. (FJM happens to have a little write up about Vidro for those interested). I mean Sexson was one thing (cheap, hits lefties), but how much of Seattle's garbage do we want to take out?

We did have some good teams under George, but for 2 reasons. 1) During his suspension, Stick and others helped to build the farm which was a big part of the dynasty 2) We spent a huge amount of money in the early days of FA when quality could be bought. Imagine during his tenure if The Boss had let Stick, Cashman and his other talented FO people make decisions, and simply funded the team.

3 simple examples. 1) He totally blew up a good team and created the 'Yankee Roadrunners', which was a huge failure and killed the team for years. 2) Shef instead of Vlad (althought at least Shef was good so that hurt us but didn't kill us 3) Getting RJ, which cost us Vaquez, Navarone and ultimately Beltran (think about that one!).

My guess is knowledgable people could quote examples of George's screw-ups for days. I mean, our $200m team was beaten by teams with 1/4 of our payroll. George also wanted to let both Andy and Bernie go, but was talked out of it. Imagine no Bernie, except on the Red Sox. Who knows how many bad decisions, like dumping Contraras, were George's.

7 I agree that Bonds might NOT be able to get back in shape, but he will be sooooo cheap, it's silly not to give it a shot. As far as the media, the Yankees can control that to a large extent. The can tell reporters not to talk to Bonds, or else be banned from the clubhouse. Bonds can have 2 statements to make: (1) 'I'm very happy to be given a chance to play for this great franchise' and (2) 'sorry guys, I gotta go now and pick up my daughter at the playground'. And lastly, if the media talks about Bonds, maybe ARod is left alone some. Having Bonds be the center of attention could be the best thing that even happened to ARod.

The Yankees are a VERY POWERFUL organization. If they want Bonds, I'm sure then can deal with all the surrounding issues in a productive way.

I don't think Abreu plays for us without a 2, or probably 3 year contract, which SHOULD NOT be considered. I'd go 1 year as a compromise, but Im not even happy about that. I assume we NEED another OFer for 2009. Is everyone sure we can get Dunn? I mean JD, Melky and Brett/JC (or some other mid-grade body)? I can't see it.

My guess is CC can be had if we want him. Pettitte and/or Moose may be good options (albeit at somewhat lower salaries). I think our SP and BP are in fine, if not great shape, for 2009. Assuming of course, we still have a quasi-elite offense.

16 ChrisS... how old are you?

when is everyone going to realize that the only reason we're keeping the fact that we're looking at LH relievers is to keep the price high for boston?

cashman is way too much of a silent trader to let it be known otherwise.

19 "My guess is knowledgable people could quote examples of George's screw-ups for days. I mean, our $200m team was beaten by teams with 1/4 of our payroll. George also wanted to let both Andy and Bernie go, but was talked out of it. Imagine no Bernie, except on the Red Sox. Who knows how many bad decisions, like dumping Contraras, were George's."

You have cited this before, but I have never seen any evidence to support the claim that the Boss wanted Bernie to go. Indeed, one could make the argument that it was only the Boss's last second appeal that kept Bernie from jumping ship. I'd like to see some proof for your claim.

Letting Andy go was THE CORRECT BASEBALL MOVE at the time, so whoever was responsible, good call.

Remind us again what who we drafted with the draft picks that we got for Andy leaving as a FA.

Yes, who knows how many bad decisions were George's. But who knows how many good decisions were his. How responsible was he for signing Moose? For getting A-Rod? For signing Giambi?

I am a huge, huge Cashman fan. But the "George makes all the bad decisions" meme is a bit tiresome, used too often to shield any criticism from the GMs. Any good move? Must be Cashman/Stick/Watson. Any bad moves? Oh, that's all the fault of George and his Tampa posse.

19 Your theee points are all flawed:

1) The Yankee "roadrunners" did not "kill the team for year". The Yankees quickly rebounded to have good teams from 1983 through 1988 (90+ wins in 83, 85 and 86).

2) Shef instead of Vlad was more than a performance decision. Contract length was an issue as Vlad was coming off some back troubles.

3) I don't think it's fair to suggest that the RJ trade was a George move. Besides, eithout RJ, the Yankees likely do not make the playoffs in 2005. Besides, Javier Vazquez has pretty much been league average, so that's not exactly a loss. Also, except for 2006, Beltran and Damon have had very similar numbers, so even that isn't a slam dunk.

It's very convenient to dump all the bad moves on George without acknowledging all the good moves. Also, as you are raising hypotheticals, imagine if Cashman listened to George and signed Big Papi?

21 I thought about that, but Boston doesn't need a LHP in its pen with Okajima and Lopez already there. The Rays don't need one either, as J.P. Howell has been great for them this year.

1 3 5 Why the continued fascination with Bonds?

I mean, what more can be written and argued? We all the terms of the debate, we all know what he potentially brings to the table as an offensive force of historical proportions, we all know that EVERY team can use what he adds on the field.

We also know the various counter arguments, whether one accepts them or not.

Whatever position one holds, it looks as though the team is simply not going to pursue the Bonds option, and with each passing day this looks more and more certain. So what is the point in rehashing the same old arguments about the man?

Sure, it's a free country. Say what you want. But at this point I find it more interesting to contemplate trades that actually could happen. It's more fun, to me anyway, to ponder what it would take to get a Jason Bay or the like.

If Cashman (or George!!) turns around and signs Bonds, I will fall out of my chair in surprise. But if that happens, then we will certainly have a good subject to talk about, especially as terms of any deal are revealed. Otherwise, continued debate about the merits of signing Bonds is simply injecting yourself with DHH (Dead Horse Hormone).

23 I've largely been skipping over the George debate, but the Randy Johnson acquisition was absolutely a Steinbrenner move, and was a major mistake. As I wrote at the time, the move was made not to make the playoffs, it was made in reaction to the team's playoff failures. Johnson was supposed to be the dominant ace who could pitch the Yankees to a championship in the postseason. Instead he blew the pivitol game in two straight first-round losses. Fastforward to this year when Dioner Navarro was an All-Star and the Yankees are resigned to Jose Molina and Chad Moeller. There's no way to shine up that particular turd.

William and I are agreeing again 22 23 . This is surely a sign of the apocalypse?

I don't think pursuing a lefty in the pen is such a bad idea. The bullpen is going strong now, but adding a good lefty would only make it deeper. I'd rather replace Hawkins with a lefty than a rehabilitating Bruney.

I'm fine with getting Washburn & Vidro for Igawa. I don't think Cashman is ever going to cut Igawa, but cutting Vidro is easier because it can be played off as part of a plan. Essentially, the Yankees would be trading Igawa and cash for Washburn. I see Washburn as a likely league average innings-eater, and I'd take a year and a half of that over the rest of Igawa's contract any day of the week.

26 I completely disagree. Regardless of why one may think they made the move, the bottom line for me is that the Unit was an instrumental part of the 2005 team. Others may not value that division title, but I know that I do, especially coming in such a close battle with the Red Sox after the 2004 collapse. Calling the deal a turd because 4 years laters Navaro has started to hit is silly, especially if you recall that many scouts scoffed at the viability of Navarro as a prospect in the first place.

nice recap of the state of affairs cliff (as usual).
though i am not sure i agree with the characterization that jorge should get over himself - especially if there is organizational pressure for this 2 week rehab.

25 the question is, will you fall off a recliner like the one barry had in sf?
i agree with you - it is apparent that the bonds option doesn't seem to be a possibility - but i think many of us don't want to overpay in prospects for people like bay and holliday - who have their merits, but may not be worth the asking price; and bonds of course costs no prospects.

26 agree with your assessmnet - but as an aside navarro seems like a pretty good example of someone that required a bit of patience with for him to develop. i hope this is an area the yanks continue to improve in.

random question - when jorge went to the dl at the beginning of the week - was the corresponding move to activate damon from the dl?

I really can't be the only one that enjoys watching Barry twist in the wind. Sometimes you really do reap what you sow.

Old Yanks Fan,

Check out this Times article from 1998:

http://tinyurl.com/5lff7b

The article reports that--

1. The Yankees offered Bernie a five-year deal, which George claimed to know about.

2. That Bernie's agent (Boras) was trying to force the Yankees hand by telling them that he had 7 and 8 year offers for him.

3. That George tried to force Boras' hand by demanding to see the offers.

4. That the Yankees had put in a tentative deal for Belle, which George claimed not to know about.

--------------

What does this suggest? That George did NOT want Bernie gone, only that he (and/or the Cashman team) preferred to give him a shorter deal. Given what happened at the end of Bernie's contract, they were correct.

Moreover, this article (http://tinyurl.com/54wq25) reports that only a face-to-face meeting between George and Bernie kept Williams a Yankee...well, that and the fact that Albert Belle signed for a lot more money with Baltimore.

The point is, it is spurious to use the almost-not-resigning of Bernie as proof of George's destructive tendencies, or that he "wanted Bernie gone." Everyone, including Bernie and Cashman, was playing hard ball in that negotiation.

26 I gotta disagree about the RJ acquisition. All signs pointed to Randy being the dominant ace. It was only in hindsight that he wasn't going to be that person (though he did win 34 games in his two years). And would Navarro have stayed in the Yankee organization with Posada still around? I can't see the Yankees keeping him in AAA for the last couple of years, or having served as BUC. I think he'd have gotten traded anyway, probably for a bad pitcher.

I'd make the trade for Washburn if for no other reason than to get rid of Igawa. And Ponson has put up some ugly numbers -- 1.7 WHIP with the Yankees so I expect him to turn into a pumpkin at any moment. Jerrod may not be much better but I doubt he'd be worse.

31 Yes, Damon for Posada.

26 Couldn't agree more. Think how much better shape we'd be in right now if we have Navarro backing up Posada. Then there'd be no question about Jorgie having surgery, we'd have someone like Moeller as a backup and we'd be in much, much better shape. We'd also have Montero and Romine coming along as heirs to Navarro. Also, perhaps Posada could've been had for less years/money if we had Navarro as a bargaining chip. William, it was really 3.5 years, Navarro has been raking since the All Star Break of last year.

As for RJ, well its true that Vazquez never became the ace we thought he would when we signed him but he wasn't all that much worse than Randy going forward. I'm not convinced that Javier + Cashman magic couldn't have got us there in 2005. And besides, getting losing in the first round is really nothing to be too proud about, especially when much of that loss can be laid at Randy's feet.