Baseball Toaster Bronx Banter
Help
Yanks Trade Pitching Prospect, Add Lefty, Santana.
2007-12-03 22:28
by Cliff Corcoran
Note: The Bronx Banter blog has moved to bronxbanterblog.com.

What? No! Not that. Sorry.

Lefty = Andy Pettitte.

Santana = Nationals' righty reliever Jonathan Santana Albaladejo.

Pitching Prospect = Tyler Clippard, who went to D.C. for Albaladejo.

Now that we've cleared that up, for all I know there could be some other news by the time you're reading this but as of 2:30am EST, when I'm writing it, the big news is that the Yankees have added the first piece to their bullpen by trading faded pitching prospect Clippard to the Nationals for Albaladejo.

It's a solid trade. The Yankees have a full rotation worth of pitching prospects who both ranked ahead of Clippard and had passed or were about to pass him on the organizational ladder, including Phil Hughes, Joba Chamberlain, Ian Kennedy, Allan Horne, and Jeffrey Marquez, not to mention 27-year-old Chien-Ming Wang, who's a back-to-back 19-game winner. With Horne and Marquez due to start the 2008 season in Triple-A and the other three ticketed for the major league rotation, there's simply no room for a B-grade starting pitching prospect such as Clippard in the upper levels of the organization.

That wasn't the case a year ago, as Clippard was considered the runner-up to Phil Hughes in the Yankees' pitching-prospect hierarchy. He fell behind in part because of the outstanding performances of Chamberlain, Kennedy, Horne, and Marquez, but also because of his own failings in 2007. Called up amid the flurry of debuting rookie starters the Yanks were forced to employ in the first half of the year, Clippard struggled in five of his six major league starts, and returned the minors without the pinpoint control that had fueled his prospect status to begin with. Clippard was actually bounced all the way down to Double-A and posted a 5.40 ERA there. Though he's still just 22, that took a considerable amount of shine off his status.

Further reducing Clippard's value to the team was the fact that his lack of a dominant out-pitch (he survives on a 90-mph fastball, some slop, and that ability to deceive hitters and locate his pitches) makes him a poor candidate for conversion to high-leverage relief. Thus, the Yankees flipped him for someone already excelling in that role, Nationals reliever Jonathan Albaladejo, who shot from Double-A to the majors last year, posting a 1.41 ERA in 38 1/3 innings between Triple-A Columbus and the majors.

A tall, 25-year-old, Puerto Rican righty, Albaladejo was drafted by the Pirates in 2001 and began his professional career as a starting pitcher in the Pittsburgh organization. He was converted to relief in 2005, finally cracked Double-A in 2006 (a season in which the presence of 3 games at Rookie league suggest an injury rehab, though I've been unable to find evidence of the actual injury), then signed with the Nationals as a six-year minor league free agent and promptly pitched his way not only to the majors, but to the New York Yankees.

Albaladejo throws in the mid-90s and appears to have tremendous control, having walked just 1.73 men per nine innings in his minor league career and just two men in his 14 1/3 major league frames. His strike out rate isn't quite as impressive, but in combination with the walks it yields a 4.27 K/BB over more than 500 minor league innings, which is remarkable. Albaladejo has also allowed less than a hit an inning in his pro career and doesn't seem to have much of an issue with home runs either (though he was somewhat protected by RFK Stadium last year).

Of course, the really big news out yesterday was Andy Pettitte's announcement that he's decided to return to the team. With Pettitte having made his announcement, the Yankees will draw up a $16-million contract for him equivalent to the player option he declined in October, and the Yankees will have a six-man rotation that, if they're smart about it, they'll use exactly as such during the season in order to suppress the innings totals of the three rookies and ease the strain on the aging elbows of Pettitte and Mussina (peak-age Wang can take his turn every five days, thus moving around in the rotation like Christmas on the calendar from year-to-year).

I find it difficult to believe that it was a coincidence that Pettitte's announcement came less than 24 hours before Hank Steinbrenner's deadline on the Johan Santana (there, I said it) trade talks. With Pettitte back in the fold, the Yankees were able to stand all the more firm in their refusal to include more than one of the top pitching prospects mentioned above in the deal. As of 1:57am EST, the latest from SI.com's Jon Heyman, who has been Jonny on the Spot on the big Yankee news thus far this postseason was this:

The Twins and Yankees reached what one person called an "impasse" shortly before midnight CST. The Twins were asking that the Yankees include either pitcher Ian Kennedy or a tandem of pitching prospect Alan Horne and outfield prospect Austin Jackson in their package with pitcher Phil Hughes and outfielder Melky Cabrera.

From ESPN.com's Jayson Stark at 1:09 the news was similar:

Even though the Yankees and Twins were still talking about different combinations as the night grew later and later, there was no indication that they were any closer to a deal for Santana than they were four days ago. In fact, if anything, the momentum seemed to be in the opposite direction. Officials from other clubs said several of the Yankees' baseball personnel at the meetings had begun openly questioning whether they even wanted to make this trade if the Twins said yes. "The more this goes on," said one AL executive, "the less they want to do it.

And our man on the scene Peter Abraham made it unanimous at 2:18:

The Johan Santana trade seems colder than hotter at this point. The Twins have acknowledged they're not getting Ian Kennedy. But they're holding out for better than what the Yankees are offering for the third player.

Why the Yankees need to have an answer on this now is a mystery. But if Hank Steinbrenner sticks to his deadline, it looks like it's not getting done.

Consider the fact that the sticking point was not the inclusion of Hughes, which the Yankees were willing to do, but the tertiary player in the deal, I'll be happy to see this one wither on the vine. Brian Cashman can takes his righty reliever and head home for all I care. Just as long as the Red Sox don't slip in when he's not looking.

In other news: The Yankees have finalized the deals for catchers Jorge Posada and Jose Molina and have thus designated Andy Phillips for assignment to clear space on the 40-man roster. Same old, same old with Andy. He's 30, hasn't brought his bat to the majors yet, and at this point is unlikely to. He may be undesirable enough to slip back to the Scranton Yankees as he did at the end of spring training. If not, with Wilson Betemit and Shelley Duncan in the house and on the bench, all that will be missed about Phillips are his boyish looks and winning personality.

Comments (378)
Show/Hide Comments 1-50
2007-12-03 23:55:41
1.   yankz
I'm really freaking out about the Sox slipping in right now. If the swapping of medical records is true, that's really terrifying.
2007-12-04 00:00:22
2.   yankz
Oh, fine, I'll go to bed.
2007-12-04 00:38:56
3.   Shaun P
1 Let them swap medical records - why would the Twins demand IPK along with Hughes and Melky, or Horne and Jackson, and then take less from the Red Sox? (That is, less than Lester + Ellsbury + another pitcher.) That doesn't make any sense.

Good luck, Ty Clip - he could have a good career in the current NL.

2007-12-04 01:12:01
4.   Cliff Corcoran
3 Too bad he won't be pitching in RFK.
2007-12-04 01:34:20
5.   Yankee Fan In Boston
hilarious title, cliff.

it looks like the sox are indeed slipping back in. i'm really curious as to what they'll have to give up.

if the yankees don't get santana, there are other, admittedly lesser options out there.

nobody panic. (i'm looking at you, hank.)

2007-12-04 03:44:03
6.   randym77
3 Just a better fit, maybe. They've been reporting all along that the Twins wanted Ellsbury even more than they wanted Hughes.

I really didn't think the Sox were serious about Santana, though. I'm still wondering if they're just messing with us.

2007-12-04 03:50:50
7.   Adrian
I've got to say, I think Melky + Hughes + Scrub is a better deal than Lester or Ellsbury + Crisp + Scrub, just on the merits. I think we've got to dance the knife edge here and bet that the Sox won't trade Lester + Ellsbury + Scrub, and that the Twins won't settle for less.

With Pettitte back, well, I'm an optimist about next year. Also, way to go on that trade with the Nationals. Hopefully Clippard will help them continue their Mets-playoff-hopes-destroying reign.

2007-12-04 03:55:02
8.   randym77
From MLBTradeRumors:

UPDATE, 12-4-07 at 2:04am: Tim Brown checks in. He confirms the Twins are checking Lester's medical records. He says the current deal on the table is Lester, Crisp, Masterson, and a minor leaguer. A Red Sox official was said to be "cautiously optimistic." If the current scenario is accurate, perhaps the Twins have finally bent on their demand for both Lester and Ellsbury.

2007-12-04 04:07:14
9.   ny2ca2dc
8 That's the same shitty deal as last week - if that gets Santana, god bless 'em, but it will be a total farce. Hughes, Melky, AND Horne, AND Jackson! Forget the Twins.
2007-12-04 04:09:47
10.   Yankee Fan In Boston
7 i agree with your assessment of the two offers being made. maybe the twins are trying to stick it to hank, but that would be an astoundingly stupid move. you only get to trade away the best pitcher in baseball once... if you're lucky. they have to try to get the best deal possible. or they should try anyway.

the yankees had better not up their offer. if the twins don't want what they're offering now, then walk away whistling. let the sox have the guy.

2007-12-04 04:09:54
11.   jeterian swing
5 Well that report is five hours old already but if it's accurate, the Sox aren't offering Ellsbury OR Bucholz AND they're pawning off Crisp's inadvisable salary on a team so intent on shedding payroll they won't even negotiate with the best pitcher in baseball beyond four years. I mean, Jon Lester? This is going to placate what should be an enraged Minnesota fanbase? This may sound paranoid, but I'm starting to believe the Twins will actually accept LESS from the Red Sox if it means keeping Santana away from the Yankees...
2007-12-04 04:20:20
12.   randym77
I think the Twins are just trying to get the best deal they can. They're good horsetraders. I like Santana, but I hate trading with the Twins.

I don't believe the Yankees are going to stick to the supposed deadline, and I suspect the Twins aren't worried about it, either.

2007-12-04 04:27:16
13.   Yankee Fan In Boston
12 if they're serious about trading johan santana for that package of players, i'd have to disagree with you about them going after the best deal.
2007-12-04 04:27:21
14.   williamnyy23
Brian Cashman can takes his righty reliever and head home for all I care. Just as long as the Red Sox don't slip in when he's not looking

But the problem is the Red Sox are going to not only slip in, but they are going to attain Santana for prospects that aren't really of value to them (especially if Lester is th centerpiece). I am all for being married to young talent, but if Boston obtains Santana, the Yankees have to be prepared to be second class citizens in the AL East for the near future. As long as they can accept and are prepared for that possibility, then I can't kill Cashman for holding on to the youth.

2007-12-04 04:33:20
15.   williamnyy23
One reason to not look forward to 2008, the following is from the NYT:

Cashman said Kyle Farnsworth would take over for Chamberlain as the Yankees' eighth-inning setup man, and the depth of the Yankees' farm system would help in potential deals.

2007-12-04 04:35:02
16.   Yankee Fan In Boston
14 the twins were asking far too much of the yankees. i'd rather santana pitched for the sox than give up that group of guys.

15 bubba crosby is our CF, too. i don't buy that for a second.

2007-12-04 04:40:46
17.   williamnyy23
16 Maybe they were asking too much? That could be, but if Boston is willing to pay the price and Johan is great over the next 5 years, I am not sure that excuse will sound as good after watching Boston win another championship or two. All you need to do is look at the Beckett trade for the gruesome road map. Sure, the Red Sox probably traded a candidate to be considered the best player in baseball for the next 10 years, but they obtained a dominant ace who was a huge cog in winning the World Series. If they make that same decision with Johan, and it pans out again, well, the words wild card to come to mind.
2007-12-04 04:41:46
18.   randym77
13 I think they're just trying to pry another player out of the Yankees. The sticking point, at least according to some of the rumors, was that the Twins wanted two prospects, if the third player wasn't going to be a A-level guy. The Yanks refused. Now they're saying, "See, the Sox are willing to give us four players."
2007-12-04 04:41:48
19.   williamnyy23
16 The only problem with the Bubba comparison is he never started for the Yankees before. Krazy Kyle has been entrusted with the role before, so there's no reason the Yankees wont bang their heads against the wall once again.
2007-12-04 04:49:37
20.   Yankee Fan In Boston
17 the only problem is that the price being asked of boston seems less steep. to me anyway. i'm not a scout or anything, but man that looks lopsided.

19 i see your point, but cashman also said that a few other teams had been asking about farnsworth. if even one team is asking, and let's all hope they are, it would be beneficial to try to generate demand, even, or especially, if none exists. i have to tell myself that is what is happening. otherwise i probably would run into traffic.

2007-12-04 04:53:39
21.   Simone
If the Red Sox get Santana, the division and World Series are theirs for at least the next 5 years. It would be unfortunate, but other than grooming an ace, there is nothing that they can do.
2007-12-04 04:57:39
22.   williamnyy23
20 I think part of the reason for that is we are invested in these prospects. I think everyone here has been following Hughes, Tabata, Jackson, etc., since they were drafted. The same goes for how Sox fans feel about Lester and Ellsbury. I, however, see Lester as a third year pitcher with control and serious health concerns and Ellsbury as a Johnny Damon-lite type of player. When you break it down, you could say Melky is a below league average hitter, decent fielder (albeit with a canon arm) and a history of no patience in the minors. Horne, meanwhile, is already 25, and has never pitched above AA. So, maybe inclusing all three isn't that much. After all, we are talking about the best pitcher in baseball.

Also, what makes the Yankees cost seem to much is the inclusion of Hughes. Hughes clearly has the most upside of all the players being discussed, so that makes it seem as if the Yankees offer is so much better. Of course, maybe the Twins prefer quantity over quality. The inclusion of Lowerie and Masterson, for example, would help restock a very depleted system.

2007-12-04 05:03:30
23.   williamnyy23
I think one other point that needs to be made is if the Yankees whiff on Johan, under no circumstances can they even think about trading Hughes (not for Bedard, Haren or any other pitcher). Santana is the best pitcher in baseball, and at 29, is still in his prime. As I view Hughes as the only significant piece in most of the proposed deals, if you aren't willing to swap him for Johan, you shouldn't be willing to deal him for anyone else.

If that's the case, I think you have to seriously downgrade your expectations for 2008. Having three rookies in the rotation is going to take its toll. Also, with innings caps, it pretty much ensures that Wang and Pettitte will be anschoring the post season again. Now, that might work better this time, but if they are facing Sabathia/Carmona and Beckett/Santana, as well as a revamped Angels team, well, I am not so sure I like their chances.

The worst thing for the Yankees would be to let the Sox get Johan and then deal Hughes for Haren.

2007-12-04 05:04:32
24.   jeterian swing
22 But they're not even being asked to include Ellsbury at this point! The rumored deal has COCO CRISP going to Minnesota. Maybe we're overrating our prospects, but at least we're not saddling the Twins with unnecessary salary by insisting they take some of our dead weight in the deal.
2007-12-04 05:08:28
25.   Yankee Fan In Boston
21 i agree whole-heartedly. many yankee fans over-value melky. lester will probably be a decent pitcher, but the centerpiece to a deal for johan santana? isn't he worth about what melky is? coco is a guy are trying to unload, not build around. if the sox give up masterson and two out of lowrie, bowden, or bard along with lester and ellsbury, that would rival the ridiculous request made to the yankees.
2007-12-04 05:13:01
26.   williamnyy23
24 In that deal, however, the Twins would be getting Lester, Lowrie and Masterson. According to most sources, Lowrie and Masterson are in the same prospect class as Horne and Jackson. If that's the case, Crisp just becomes a throw in 4th player who fills a short-term hole. Again, I think the Twins would be crazy to not want Hughes, but from their standpoint, they might rather add more parts than simply replace Santana with a cheaper, but inferior replacement.
2007-12-04 05:14:47
27.   Yankee Fan In Boston
23 "The worst thing for the Yankees would be to let the Sox get Johan and then deal Hughes for Haren."

i agree. hughes must stay. i think that many in these parts agree with that.

24 i'd imagine the sox would have to pay at least part of his salary. with renteria off their books this coming season, they probably figure that they can afford it. the jerks.

2007-12-04 05:14:50
28.   Mattpat11
I'd rather they dumped Igawa on the Nationals.
2007-12-04 05:16:55
29.   williamnyy23
Not to change the topic, but how huge was Arod and the Yankees decision to rekindle their romance. With the Marlins high demands for Miggy, I don't think it would have been possible to find a suitable replacement. Adding Johan to the Sox and subtracting Arod from the Yankees would have been white flag territory.
2007-12-04 05:17:54
30.   Yankee Fan In Boston
28 has pavano been cut yet? not physically, i'm sure he's injuring himself as we speak, but have the yankees released him?
2007-12-04 05:19:53
31.   Yankee Fan In Boston
29 imagine the angels lineup with cabrera in there. as of yesterday things were progressing in that direction. ouch.
2007-12-04 05:21:15
32.   williamnyy23
31 Cabrera and Vlad would rival Manny and Ortiz for sure, but the rest of the lineup doesn't scare me, especially if Kendrick and Mathis are included in the trade.
2007-12-04 05:23:50
33.   Mattpat11
20 The last few times we tried to generate demand for this lump we refused to trade him. I think the Yankees Organization has a significantly higher opinion of Kyle Farnsworth than anyone else in baseball.
2007-12-04 05:25:15
34.   Yankee Fan In Boston
31 i don't know. if wood lives up to the hype they could do some damage in that division.
2007-12-04 05:26:18
35.   jeterian swing
26 I asked this question yesterday and I'm still not sure why it hasn't come up as a serious possibility: Though we know nothing about these negotiations, wouldn't a logical package for both clubs here look something like Kennedy/Melky/Horne/Jackson or Tabata in exchange for Santana? Is that not superior to the Sox's current offer? (I.e., all pieces are essentially equal except that Melky costs a lot less than Crisp? And with money being a serious consideration for the Twins, that's not something to sneeze at?) That way we could keep Hughes and justify trading four solid B prospects. Which side would say no to that deal? If it's the Twins, and they say yes to this proposed deal with the Sox, then either I have SERIOUSLY overrated our prospects (a possibility) or the Sox are getting a discount.

This said, I continue to believe this is posturing and Santana will be a Yankee, coming at the not-insignificant sum of Hughes/Melky/AJax. What can you say? Either way, we lose.

2007-12-04 05:27:05
36.   Yankee Fan In Boston
33 well, we have some former yankees over in LA now... maybe they're still under the farnsworthian spell?
2007-12-04 05:28:38
37.   ChuckM
22 Horne missed a lot of time due to TJ surgery and may possibly be used as a RP this year, which I think is a very real possibility once Famadooke goes down in flames again, so he could wind up being quite valuable to the Yanks.
2007-12-04 05:31:12
38.   Mattpat11
36 I don't think they liked him when they were here.
2007-12-04 05:31:44
39.   Sarasota
What the Twins really want is Hughes and Ellsbury...that ain't gonna happen.....but the Twins can afford to be greedy here for the moment.
With Andy back Yanks should re work the deal. IPK + Melky (why does anyone want to hold on to him except that maybe Cano's "feelings" might be hurt when Melky's traded) + Jackson + Ohlendorf (if they want our version of Cocco give them Farnsworthless + cash instead).
Hughes should stay. If we take a hit in 2008 with Joba/Phil/IPK so be it. The Yanks should invest wisely with these 3; they could be their version of the Orioles front 3 of the early 70's. Not a bad deal at all.
2007-12-04 05:32:08
40.   williamnyy23
35 I don't think the Twins are that high on Kennedy (he would be the Masterson comp to the Sox deal; not the Lester comp). From what I read, the Twins want either Jackson or Horne as the 3rd player. What I don't understand is how at age 25, Horne is so highly touted, especially considering that the Yankees seem inclinded to start him in the minors again. I am not doubting that Horne has great stuff, but how many star pitchers didn't crack the majors until 25/26?

Also, I am not sure why you'd assume the Yankees are in a lose/lose situation. If Johan is really on his way to being an all-timer, then his next five seasons would make whomever acquires him a very big winner.

2007-12-04 05:34:32
41.   Sliced Bread
Screw the Twins, and Red Sox. Those clubs, despite their posturing, and maneuvering are merely impotent observers.

I maintain this is between Santana and the Yanks.

If Johan wants to make the most money possible, for the highest number of years, on baseball's greatest stage, and maybe win a championship along the way, he's a Yankee-in-waiting.

2007-12-04 05:39:20
42.   Yankee Fan In Boston
38 ha!

so they WERE watching!

2007-12-04 05:39:26
43.   williamnyy23
41 It isn't between Santana and the Yanks because Johan isn't a free agent. There is no way he vetos a deal to Boston if they offer him a lucrative long-term deal.
2007-12-04 05:41:10
44.   Sarasota
33 well, as I remember it.....Farnsworth was all Cashman. He isn't going to back off now........especially with Hank breathing down his neck so hard.
2007-12-04 05:42:45
45.   Mattpat11
44 Then he must die.

I'm sorry.

2007-12-04 05:43:18
46.   Sliced Bread
43 If he knows a much more lucrative longterm deal awaits him in NY he'd be a fool not to wait a few months for it.

I'm hoping he decides to stay in Minnesota until he's a free agent.

2007-12-04 05:44:09
47.   Rob Middletown CT
1. Tyler Clippard trade: I'm ok with it. They may indeed have sold low, but it seems more likely to me that the naysayers were right and Clippard just doesn't have the stuff to succeed at the highest level (AL). Best of luck in Washington, Tyler.

Mind you, what this reliever did was in the JV league. We shall see if it translates (Viscaino, anyone?).

2. I'm pleased that the Hughes+ for Santana deal appears to have fallen apart. However, it would seem that the Red Sox may get him for what is in my opinion a lesser group of prospects, which is doubly annoying. Mostly, I'm worried that the Sox get Santana and Hank freaks out and orders something really stupid.

2007-12-04 05:44:31
48.   williamnyy23
39 If I was Minnesota, there is no way I'd accept Kennedy as the frontline player in a deal.
2007-12-04 05:46:53
49.   williamnyy23
46 I am sorry, but if I was a ML pitcher, knowing that my ligament could snap at any time, there is no way I put a huge payday on hold for a year. Also, while you, as a Yankee fan, think the Bronx is the best place to play, Boston has emerged as a more than viable alternative for players seeking a ring on a great baseball stage.
2007-12-04 05:48:13
50.   Sarasota
43 very big if...Henry would have to dip into his own cash reserve in Boston, not to mention Epsteins reluctance to trade prospects (he walked out on them before over similar issues) These guys don't like to do that. Twins Pohland is perhaps the richest owner in baseball and he is reluctant to anti up. Santana's $22M + salary will strain the Sox.
Show/Hide Comments 51-100
2007-12-04 05:48:15
51.   Rob Middletown CT
If Boston gets the Twins to sign off on the trade, and offers Johan a good contract, he will take it, I'm sure.

I'm not happy about the prospect of facing a team that will run out Santana, Beckett, DiceK, Shilling and Bucholtz, believe me. But if the price of preventing that is trading Hughes + Kennedy + Melky or Hughes + Melky + Horne + Jackson... I still say no.

2007-12-04 05:49:29
52.   Sarasota
48 well from the Yanks point of view...I say fine. I'm holdin'.
2007-12-04 05:51:03
53.   williamnyy23
50 Big if? According to all reports, the Sox are making legitimate proposals right now. Do you think they don't also plan to negotiate a long-term deal? As for the 22M cripling the Sox, well, they have some money coming off the books in 2009. Also, the Red Sox have emerged as a cash generating machine. I don't think money will prevent them from competing.

As for the comparison between Henry and Pohlad, well, one cares about winning and the other only cares about money.

2007-12-04 05:53:37
54.   williamnyy23
52 That's fine...just be prepared to face Beckett and Santana 12 times next season.
2007-12-04 05:56:50
55.   ms october
based on some of the stories i read, it sounds like the yankees were starting to talk themselves out of this deal as they did not want to give up hughes - especially those who were against including him in the first place.

there is also rumblings that if the angels can't get miguel cabrera - they will get in on the santana talks.

and, the twins asking for lester's medical records could be part of the ploy to get the yankees back in.
it seems like in any of the proposed deals, boston is being asked to give up fewer pieces that are important to their future though. which sucks because teams are always trying to extract more from the yanks - but it really does reinforce having a surplus of talent in the farm

49 i agree with that statement, but santana would probably get more money as a free agent than just sigining an extension as part of a trade - so i guess it depends if he wants to take the risk.

2007-12-04 05:57:08
56.   Sarasota
53 the Red Sox are trying to drive up the price. Published reports are just that.... to drive interest, whether for their fan base or to make it more difficult on the Yankees. the Yankees offer so far is better than Twins can or should expect. Hughes is a steep price to pay. The Sox certainly will look good in 09.
2007-12-04 05:58:39
57.   williamnyy23
55 I don't think he'd get that much more, especially if the $22mn/year terms are correct. That would blow the next highest paid pitcher (non-Clemens) out of the water.
2007-12-04 05:58:58
58.   Sliced Bread
49 Boston has always been a viable alternative to playing in NY. Recent championships have made it more so, that is true.

But if you're a two time Cy Young winner in your prime, who has expressed your desire to play in NY, you're not losing sleep over your ligaments (as you suggest). And you are certainly not losing sight of your dream to play in New York, and the dollars and years that await you there.

I see no reason why Santana wouldn't refuse a trade to Boston if he was assured that a greater payday awaits him in the big city.

2007-12-04 05:59:29
59.   Sarasota
54 . I'm OK with that; let the chips fall. Then in 09 if Hughes and Joba especially are the real deal we're set up very nicely going forward. patience is a virtue. One season is not a high price to pay.
2007-12-04 06:01:48
60.   williamnyy23
56 I think it would be a huge mistake for the Yankees to think the Sox are just pretending interest to drive up the price. Foolishness like that will ensure Santana is pitching at Fenway next season. Theo is a smart guy...I am sure he realizes that as soon as the ink dries on a Johan contract, all of Boston and MLB will talking "dynasty".
2007-12-04 06:02:45
61.   Yankee Fan In Boston
54 beckett faced the yankees 4 times last season, pitched 26.2 innings, gave up 33 hits and 13 ER. that is a 4.39 ERA.

meh.

santana, on the other hand, 7 innings, just 4 hits and 2 runs. (2.57 ERA)

small samples, i know.

2007-12-04 06:03:39
62.   ms october
57 yeah if that is correct, he probably wouldn't get much more than that.

here's a funny distraction from the sanatana talks that was burried in the 'espn winter meetings blog' -
"But [David] Eckstein might have missed an opportunity when he failed to jump on a four year offer from the Mets."

2007-12-04 06:03:40
63.   williamnyy23
58 Who said it was Santana's dream to play in New York? Even if it was, I am sure EVERY player worries about injuries when considering long-term deals. To think Santana isn't is kind of foolish. Finally, Santana can't be sure of what the Yankees will offer him in 2008.
2007-12-04 06:04:31
64.   Mattpat11
54 One thing to maybe hold a little bit of hope. Santana's numbers in Fenway have been poor.
2007-12-04 06:05:29
65.   Sarasota
all this talk of dynasty is bull....... considering the wild card and short 5 game play off series has had a surprising effect on eventual winners recently. It's all a crap shoot. The Indians looked unbeatable against the Yanks didn't they?????????
2007-12-04 06:06:55
66.   Mattpat11
59 The one thing that worries me about waiting on Hughes and the like to mature. Baseball in the last ten years is littered with the next Roger Clemenses that flamed out.
2007-12-04 06:07:26
67.   Yankee Fan In Boston
uh.... http://tinyurl.com/2uy4c4

Lester, Crisp, Ellsbury, and Lowrie?

2007-12-04 06:08:24
68.   Sliced Bread
63 Santana needs to look no further than any of the Yankee free agent signings this winter to realize in terms of dollars and years nobody pays like the Yankees.

For a player who has said he wants to play here, it would seem foolish to accept anything less.

Yes, players are always concerned about their health, but a world class athlete like Santana is not losing sleep over blowing a ligament while he waits a few months for the ultimate payday.

2007-12-04 06:09:32
69.   51cq24
60 if you're wrong and the red sox aren't really trying to get him, it would be a huge mistake to give up more than the hughes/melky package.

65 santana/beckett would make it less of a crap shoot.

2007-12-04 06:10:35
70.   williamnyy23
59 If you are guaranteeing that Hughes will begin a Santana-like career in 2009, then taking a step back in 2008 makes a lot of sense. Of course, you had better be right, or at least factored in the possibility that you might be wrong into your strategy. Simply taking a pie in the sky approach to the "kids" isn't the long-term philosophy I'd like the Yankees to be holding. Hopefully, they are being much more realistic in their projections.
2007-12-04 06:11:01
71.   ms october
67 seems weird to include both ellsbury and crisp, but if i am the twins, i would push for both lester and ellsbury.
who knows what is going on behind the scenes, but it seems like the twins keep trying to get the yanks to include ipk, but are not trying to make the red sox include both lester and ellsbury. but, if the twins can get both lester and ellsbury, they are most likely taking that package.
2007-12-04 06:11:03
72.   Sarasota
66 I agree. That worries me also, and I'd love santana too, I just don't wanna pay for him 2+ times. I also love the homegrown kids.
2007-12-04 06:12:15
73.   OldYanksFan
"Though we know nothing about these negotiations, wouldn't a logical package for both clubs here look something like Kennedy/Melky/Horne/Jackson or Tabata"
----------------------------------------
I do think the Twins would go for that. Howver, in 2010, if all goes well, those 5 guys are ALL projected to be starters.
IPK and Horne (right now) are our #3 and #4 SP prospects. We have 1 (maybe 2) years of Abreu and 2 years of Mats and JD.

So 2010 projects to be: Wang, Hughes, Joba, IPK, Horne and a vet. Our OF might be Melky, AJax and Tabata. I don't think this will necessarily happen, as we might trade any of these pieces for upgrades. But they are our foundation, and 'worst case' scenario.

2007-12-04 06:13:46
74.   Mattpat11
72 I could give a crap where our players come from.
2007-12-04 06:14:14
75.   RIYank
68 I dunno, look at JD Drew's contract, or the total amount spent for Dice-K. Or Zito's contract, for that matter. Several teams are probably eager to 'overpay' Johan Santana.

I think the Boras advice would surely be to play out the year and enjoy the bidding frenzy next year, though. Players could do worse than to ask themselves, WWSBD?

67 That's the biggest package yet. Lester with Jacoby and Cocoa, along with a vg lower tier prospect? That has to be tempting.

2007-12-04 06:14:20
76.   williamnyy23
65 The Red Sox have one WS in the bank. If they have Beckett and Santana anchoring a staff over the next four years, I wouldn't want to be against them adding another one or two trophies to the mantle. Also, because you are penciling in great seasons for Joba and Hughes in 2009, I guess you'd have to do the same for Buccholz too? If Dice K every lives up to his hype, the Red Sox would definitely have a rotation capable of fueling a dynasty.
2007-12-04 06:15:02
77.   Yankee Fan In Boston
according to the daily news, the yankees are "passing" on santana:

http://tinyurl.com/29rswj

haren, anyone?

2007-12-04 06:16:59
78.   RIYank
Instead of Haren, is there any point in making the O's an offer for Bedard?
I understand that they aren't so eager to deal him, but Bedard seems to me more likely to be the next Santana than Haren is.
2007-12-04 06:17:00
79.   Andre
I have to say that if the Sox offer is Lester + Ellsbury that would be a better sure thing for the Twins than Hughes + Melky. Ellsbury is much better than Melky with less service time, and Lester is a proven 3/5 starter while Hughes has "potential" to be a 1/2. It's about proof vs. potential. If the Twins trade Santana away, they've got to show something for the trade and Lester should be a sure thing to contribute this year. Throwing in Crisp just allows them to get another player or two from another team like the White Sox who seem to be interested in Crisp.

The Yanks' offers are all about "potential" outside of Melky, and Melky is just an average CF that happens to be cheap.

2007-12-04 06:17:15
80.   Sarasota
70 nothing is guaranteed william. I just love the upside of the kids and think that gambling on Santana being there in July for less might make better sense as a Yanks fan. I just don't beleive the Red Sox have what it takes to pull it off unless the Twins take a lesser offer.
2007-12-04 06:17:51
81.   ny2ca2dc
67 75 Now that's a pretty good package from the Sawx. Twins would get a starting CF with all-star potential, starting SS, #3 starter, and coco crisp who could maybe spun off for a wilson betemit type. Santana might be going to Boston yet. Christ.

If so, the Yanks really have to just stand pat with Hughes. Trading Hughes ++ for a Bedard or Haren could be a disaster.

2007-12-04 06:18:16
82.   williamnyy23
67 That would confirm my suspicion that Boston was bluffing in saying that they wouldn't include Lester and Ellsbury in the same deal (they would be stupid not to). Then, the Sox, who now have a great relationship with Boras, sign Andruw Jones, and the team becomes a monster.

Yikes...it seems as if the Yankees are really being outmaneuvered here...

2007-12-04 06:18:38
83.   Yankee Fan In Boston
78 he's pitched in the division. i'd be surprised if they hadn't at least called the orioles about it.
2007-12-04 06:20:54
84.   Mattpat11
77 I don't want Danny Vazquez.
2007-12-04 06:21:58
85.   ny2ca2dc
82 Hank's big mouth really isn't so endearing right about now.

Though I have to say, if Johan couldn't be had with a package of say 3 or 4 of Melky, Horne, IPK, and AJax or Tabata, then the Yanks are just not a great partner for the Twins.

2007-12-04 06:24:06
86.   RIYank
82 The Sox don't have a great relationship with Boras. Where did you get that idea? They screwed him in the Dice-K deal.

If the Sox trade away all those prospects and then pay Santana and Andruw, they become a great team for 2008, maybe 2009, but they've sold off their future. I can't believe that's the strategy. They're a terrific team now. Theo looks over to Foxboro and sees that once you're a great team, you start looking years down the road -- that's how you build a dynasty.

2007-12-04 06:26:32
87.   OldYanksFan
66 That's true. But there are also a lot of young stud pitchers now that were stud prospects. And we have seen a bit of Hughes, Joba and IPK, and not under the best circumstances. I think at worse we have 2 better-then-average guys, and more probably a #2, #3 and #4.

2008 is not the last year of MLB. We have a very nice group of MLB youth and a ton of quality trading chips.

However, I believe the Twins will get their best deal from the Sox (which won't be that great) and then come to the Yanks and give them a chance to top it with a Highes list. I believe the Yanks will get last shot.

2007-12-04 06:28:08
88.   williamnyy23
69 If the Yankees sweeten the package when less would have sealed the deal, the only risk comes if BOTH Hughes and that third player become stars. If all of the Yankees prospects are really going to be stars, Damon Oppenheimer deserves the Nobel Prize in everything.

75 2010? If you have found a formula that an project 3 seasons into the future, please share it!!

77 The same article, which really isn't definitive, states that the price for Haren would at least be the same as for Johan. As Haren isn't in Johan's stratosphere, that would be the height of foolishness.

79 Lester is far from proven...if anything, he comes with more questions than Hughes because of his health. I think Hughes is the closest thing to a sure thing if there was one.

80 I love the kids too...but I also realize the baseball junk pile is littered with once promising kids. I understand your preference to sign Santana as a FA, but every indication suggests that will not be possible. If tonight, the Sox acquire and sign Johan to a long-term deal, what will be your opinion then?

2007-12-04 06:28:14
89.   Sarasota
82 I think you said it best. Both Theo and Cashman see that as central to their long term strategy. It's all the bluster that gets in the way sometimes that makes it all so cloudy.
2007-12-04 06:28:24
90.   williamnyy23
69 If the Yankees sweeten the package when less would have sealed the deal, the only risk comes if BOTH Hughes and that third player become stars. If all of the Yankees prospects are really going to be stars, Damon Oppenheimer deserves the Nobel Prize in everything.

75 2010? If you have found a formula that an project 3 seasons into the future, please share it!!

77 The same article, which really isn't definitive, states that the price for Haren would at least be the same as for Johan. As Haren isn't in Johan's stratosphere, that would be the height of foolishness.

79 Lester is far from proven...if anything, he comes with more questions than Hughes because of his health. I think Hughes is the closest thing to a sure thing if there was one.

80 I love the kids too...but I also realize the baseball junk pile is littered with once promising kids. I understand your preference to sign Santana as a FA, but every indication suggests that will not be possible. If tonight, the Sox acquire and sign Johan to a long-term deal, what will be your opinion then?

2007-12-04 06:28:28
91.   Mattpat11
87 If they're a 2, 3, and 4, we should trip over ourselves making this trade. I hope they're significantly better than that.
2007-12-04 06:28:39
92.   rconn23
It doesn't matter if the Sox sign Jones or not. The trade for Santana is almost done and they will be unstoppable for the next three or four years.

Hell, by the time we're ready to compete with the Red Sox again Hughes, IPK and Joba will be ready for new contracts.

Welcome to the 1980s all over again.

God, I wish Steinbrenner would sell the team so we didn't have to put up with his maniac son. As long as Hank is in charge, we are dead.

2007-12-04 06:29:03
93.   ny2ca2dc
82 Although, signing Andruw and adding Santana would add probably $30mil this year, and >$40mil next (If Santana gets his 13 this year and like 25 next, Andruw getting maybe 15-17 or so). I wonder if they'd really add that much payroll. They'd be demolishing the luxury tax barrier, I believe.
2007-12-04 06:30:22
94.   ChuckM
58 Um, Gardenhire and Torii Hunter said it...

Even manager Ron Gardenhire commented on it. "I hate to say it, but he loves it here," Gardenhire said. "He loves the big stage, the big stadium."

"He loves New York," Hunter said. "He'll be great here."

2007-12-04 06:30:24
95.   williamnyy23
86 I think the JD contract took care of that nicely. Also, by all accounts, the Dice-K deal was ammicable. I'll look for a link, but I've read many times that the Sox and Boras are enjoying a nice relationship.
2007-12-04 06:32:12
96.   williamnyy23
86 They'd still have Buccholz, Pedroia, Papelbon and a solid farm with names like Masterson, Bowden and Anderson. That's the thing...the Yankees or Boston can trade a lot of prospects and still have a lot of prospects. Aat some point, the Yankees will have to cash some in for proven talent...if not for Santana, when?
2007-12-04 06:33:18
97.   yankz
Why would the Twins take Ellsbury AND Coco?

And I really can't believe there are Yankee fans who'd rather lose with kids than win with the best players in the world. Yeah, I love Hughes. You know what I love more? Winning.

2007-12-04 06:33:22
98.   Sarasota
88 I'd swallow hard and hope that the Yanks continue to hit Beckett as they kind of did last year and hope that their offense can get to the Sox bullpen (the OKIE DOKIE was bullshit) and that we get the opportunity in a 7 game series vs a 5....and if it doesn't work in 2008 I will have made a valiant competitive effort and will re asses for 2009.
2007-12-04 06:34:26
99.   williamnyy23
92 What? I could understand that argument if you were against the Santana deal, but it seems you are taking the opposite view.
2007-12-04 06:34:48
100.   JL25and3
68 If Boston makes a trade for Santana, it will be because they intend to give him plenty of money and plenty of years. They know what the situation is. Maybe he'd make a few million more with the Yankees, but he might well not want to give up 6/130 in the hand for 7/155 in the bush.

If he wants to win championships, Boston - with Santana - is a much better bet than coming to NY.

And as for the biggest stage, well, that's part of the catechism of Yankee arrogance - and if the Red Sox get Santana, we're going to have to get used to the idea of abandoning that. The Red Sox don't exactly hurt for national media coverage as it is. A couple more championships for the Sox - and a couple of also-ran seasons for the Yankees - and we'll see what looks like the biggest stage.

Show/Hide Comments 101-150
2007-12-04 06:35:07
101.   Sarasota
93 .........correct. I don't think the Sox have what it takes. I'll be shocked if they do.
2007-12-04 06:35:48
102.   williamnyy23
94 But did Santana say it? In fact, the Minn. Star Trib had an article stating Sanatana angrily denied saying he'd refuse an in-season deal as well as saying he'd only play for Boston of the Yankees.
2007-12-04 06:37:58
103.   williamnyy23
98 I'd prefer to build a team designed to beat its competitors...not to swallow hard and hope they can steal a series.
2007-12-04 06:38:01
104.   Yankee Fan In Boston
minnesota papers are hearing coco and ellsbury now....

http://tinyurl.com/2vl83k

2007-12-04 06:38:23
105.   JL25and3
59 One season? The development of pitchers is so secure that we can figure on one year of growing pains followed by big-time success?

66 's point is important, except that it's not just the last ten years. Hughes might turn into Santana, the top three might turn into the early-70's Orioles. Or Hughes could become Ben Sheets, Ben McDonald, or Todd Van Poppell; and the top three could become the A's Four Aces.

2007-12-04 06:39:05
106.   yankz
If Boston gets Santana, I also don't know why some of you think the playoffs are still guaranteed. Counting on the Wild Card is not very inspiring.
2007-12-04 06:41:08
107.   Yankee Fan In Boston
106 if boston gets santana, they aren't guaranteed the division.

(they'll win it, but they aren't guaranteed it.)

2007-12-04 06:41:17
108.   OldYanksFan
70 Please William.... Phil does NOT have to be Santana. The Yankees need an above average pitching staff, not the best. Last year, we won the WC and were not far from the division (considering our first 2 months of pitching horrors) with a staff that finished 8th of 14.

As I argued with Jim Dean (RIP) last year, Cashman is not done and will not be done in April. Cash favors mid/late season deals, after he has assessed our needs at the moment.

The truth is many here ARE comming from a place of emotion. We DO want to take a chance with 'our own'. With our offense, farm and money we are always a contender.

I believe most GMs in baseball, including the Sox, know that player development is the way to sustained success.

2007-12-04 06:45:44
109.   OldYanksFan
88 Well... Cash refused to throw in ANY one of them to get Johan Santana. You think he's saving them as chips for another big trade? I got no formula, but when you won't give up any FOUR of these guys to get the BEST SP in baseball, my guess is they are in the Yankees plan for the future.
2007-12-04 06:47:47
110.   Rob Middletown CT
The sky will not fall if Boston gets Santana. It's not a good thing, obviously, but it's also not the end of the world. Take it easy.
2007-12-04 06:48:52
111.   Sarasota
103 Big picture william. Hope for the best in 2008 but it's not a hope and prayer (we have yet to see the young 3 go a full sched yet).....but I'm giving it a best shot w/o giving up the farm in 2008.
2007-12-04 06:50:12
112.   williamnyy23
108 Yes...he does...that is, if you expect the Yankees to be better than the Red Sox. As long as Boston has Beckett and Santana at the head of their rotation (not to mention Dice and Buccholz), the Yankees will need to match them. Having an above average (how much above?) wont cut it. Like it or not, if the Yankees let Boston get Santana, the kids had better be very good (above average simply wont cut it).

Whether Cashman is done or not wont matter, because unless he can pry Brandon Webb away, there probably isn't another pitcher available who is as good as Johan. Also, if you think the likes of Haren and Bedard will be cheap, guess again.

Finally, there is nothing wrong with approaching this issue with emotion, but you have to realize that emotion often gets in the way of sound decisions. It's nice to want to win with your "own", but the point, after all, is to just win.

As for everyone knowing development is the way to sustained success, well, when was the last world champ to be dominated by home grown talent (certainly not Boston's last two champs). The key to success is accumulating the best talent. Besides, even if the Yankees make this deal, they'd still have a strong farm system as well as young major leagues like Cano and Joba in the majors.

2007-12-04 06:50:58
113.   ny2ca2dc
110 Right, but they would be expected to win ~100 games. Or more.
2007-12-04 06:53:21
114.   williamnyy23
109 Or, and he admitted this yesterday, maybe Cashman is also dealing with emotion. It seems as if he wants to see his kids succeed so badly (maybe to erase the stigma that he can't succeed with money), that it might be clouding his judgment. On the one hand, Cash seems reticent to make the deal, while on the other, Hank seems overly anxious. That can't be a good formula.
2007-12-04 06:53:24
115.   Sliced Bread
100 6/$130 mill in hand would be very nice, but I think substantially more than 7/$155 mill awaits him in the NY bush.

More like 8/$180 mill or more with bonuses, which is well worth waiting a few months for.

2007-12-04 06:56:18
116.   williamnyy23
111 The big picture is the Yankees will have abandoned a chance to acquire the best pitcher in baseball, who at 29, should still be very good in those future years you are talking about. Also, you keep talking about Joba (the young 3) in this equation, but we all know he is staying regardless. At the highest price to the Yankees, its Johan for Hughes and Kennedy (and doesn't belong in Hughes/Joba's class anyway).

This isn't a one year rental...it's a five year deal with the games best pitcher. If we are all lucky, Hughes might be almost as good as Santana over this stretch.

2007-12-04 06:58:59
117.   williamnyy23
115 Those numbers are pulled out of thin air...do you have any evidence to support that figure, or is that just your opinion? I'd be shocked if Santana did better than 6/$150mn (which is just my opinion).
2007-12-04 06:59:09
118.   Sliced Bread
115 and why can the Yanks afford that much more? Because NY is the biggest stage in baseball. That's not Yankee arrogance talking. 100 That's the truth. Substantially bigger ballpark & bigger media market.

Regardless of how many championships the Red Sox win, Boston is not going to be a bigger stage than NY.

2007-12-04 07:00:47
119.   Sarasota
116 point of view.....we agree to disagree....while I don't think IPK is in the same class as Hughes/Joba I love his make up (he's holding up the Santana deal)and if he approaches them well......I'm sold.
2007-12-04 07:01:05
120.   rbj
104 How does Boston get Santana for Coco + Ellsbury, but the Yankees need to offer Melky + Phil + IPK. Why are the Twins asking for much more from Brian than Theo? Unless, of course, the Twins had no real intention of trading with NY.
2007-12-04 07:01:16
121.   OldYanksFan
Last year, we scored 900+ runs, were 8th (of 14) in pitching, won the WC and missed the division by 2 games. So this year, if we have the 3rd or 4th best pitching, you don't think we MIGHT see the PS. Who are we competing with for the WC? Detroit/Indians and Seattle? Did losing to WC teams in the PS make you feel better because they were only the WC?

If we don't get Santana, we still have a very talented youth core (Wang, Cano, Hughes, Joba, IPK and sorta Melky), TONS of money and lots of high end pitching prospects. Considering our offense, regardless of what Boston does, I still think we are in good shape.

We may not have the best team on paper, as we did in many of the 2000-2007 years, but we are not quite doomed either.

2007-12-04 07:01:25
122.   williamnyy23
118 The bigger ballpark and market doesn't make NY the bigger stage. The Yankees success as made NY the biggest stage. Do you really think NY was a bug stage in the late 1980s/early 1990s? Heck, many players wouldn't even think about playing for the Yankees back then.
2007-12-04 07:01:39
123.   Shaun P
40 "I am not doubting that Horne has great stuff, but how many star pitchers didn't crack the majors until 25/26?"

I can't believe no one has answered this question yet. Two names we all know:

Ron Guidry, 1st full season, 1977, age 26
Chien-Ming Wang, 1st full season, 2006, age 26

I'm sure there are others. The reason it makes Horne so valuable, BTW, is he's past the "pitcher injury nexus" of 21-24. He already was hurt (TJ in college IIRC), and has clearly come all the way back. Thus, the odds of him suffering another significant elbow injury are greatly reduced.

AND - Horne pitched 153.3 innings at AA last year. That means, by the "rule of 30", he could pitch 183.3 innings next year, even in the bigs, and then 213.3 in 2009 and beyond. Knowing you can use a guy for that many innings without worrying about injury is incredibly valuable.

2007-12-04 07:04:54
124.   Yankee Fan In Boston
120 the appearance of tampering doesn't usually make things easier.
2007-12-04 07:04:56
125.   williamnyy23
119 I'm not really debating whether keeping the kids is a rational position (at least I hope not), but just that many seem to not be appreciating the risks that go into prospects as well as the danger of allowing Boston to acquire Santana. If you accept those risks and still want to win with the kids, well, I can't argue. If, however, you think Santana wont be traded to Boston and that he isn't more likely to outpitch Hughes and Kennedy over the next 3 years or so, well, then I think you are way off base.
2007-12-04 07:06:32
126.   mehmattski
I paid the price for staying up late and have just read through the comments. Seems like a lot of the same arguments are being raised. Some points:

1) Santana-Beckett-DiceK-Schilling-Buchholz is scary good, and the Yankees will struggle to compete.

2) 108 I'm going to remind you that you said we only need an "above average" pitching staff the next time the Yanks are bounced in the first round of the playoffs and you start screaming about pitching, like you did this year.

3) Don't count on Dan Haren. Not only did Beane start by asking for Hughes AND Joba... but the Tigers are reportedly willing to offer Andrew Miller AND Cameron Maybin. Nothing the Yankees have is going to compete with that.

2007-12-04 07:06:33
127.   williamnyy23
121 I don't think anyone is saying doomed, but that doesn't mean you pass up the chance to be "considered" the best team in baseball, especially when the alternative is to have your division rival assume that mantle.
2007-12-04 07:06:33
128.   OldYanksFan
On a scale of 1-10, can anyone say how much/good Albaladejo upgrades our BP?
2007-12-04 07:09:47
129.   Shaun P
123 BTW, all that is why I wouldn't let Horne go if I were the Yankees.

122 Very true, but in terms of endorsement potential, New York is a much better place. In New England, you already have Brady, and the Patriots in general, and Big Papi, and the Sox in general, plastered over everything - and now the Celtics and their "Big 3" too!

In NY, there's Jeter, A-Rod, the Yanks in general (?) and Wright (I guess?), but no one of any note on the football or basketball teams, and its a significantly bigger market.

In any case, I don't think this is really pertinent to the discussion; I'm just tired of seeing Brady, the Pats, Big Papi, the Sox, and the Celtics everywhere I turn.

2007-12-04 07:09:49
130.   Rob Middletown CT
Remember to adjust his numbers from the NL east (in a pitchers park) to the AL east, Old Yanks Fan...
2007-12-04 07:09:49
131.   Yankee Fan In Boston
126 3) holy crap.
2007-12-04 07:10:41
132.   YankeeInMichigan
The Yankees have won 26 world championships. Steve Goldman may correct me on this, but I'll go out on a limb and say that the only one of those championship teams (1978) had baseball's best pitcher on the roster.

With Beckett and Santana at the top of their rotation, the Red Sox will be the best team on paper in 2008, and will be especially well positioned for October success. The Yankees will have a roster capable of 93 wins (give or take 5 with luck or lack of same). That's good enough to probably make the playoffs, and from that point they can get lucky. For 2009-2011, I like the Yankees. If Hughes/Joba/IPK turn out to be Hudson/Mulder/Zito or Maddox/Smoltz/Glavine, this can be a truly great team.

2007-12-04 07:11:47
133.   williamnyy23
123 Guidry's first full season was at 26, but that's because the Yankees made him toil in 1974 and 1975. Wang is a good example...he really logged some time in the minors.

If Horne is really a bonafide starting prospect, shouldn't that make IPK more expendable? It's great that the Yankees have so many good young arms, but are they all going to pan out?

2007-12-04 07:13:50
134.   Mattpat11
108 And we were humiliated on the first round of the playoffs when our "good enough" pitching staff fell apart.
2007-12-04 07:14:56
135.   Shaun P
126 "1) Santana-Beckett-DiceK-Schilling-Buchholz is scary good, and the Yankees will struggle to compete."

Maybe so, but that's why they play the games. Someone wake me up when Boston actually has Santana traded for and signed. In the meantime, all this worrying over how dominating the Red Sox might be is of no concern to me.

2007-12-04 07:15:08
136.   mehmattski
130 Well, sure, but remember that Albaladejo (I've had has name to copy-paste since last night) had some pretty good numbers at every level of the minor leagues as well. His major league numbers reek more of small sample size (14 IP) than they do of park effects.

FWIW, Albaladejo's home-road splits in 2007:

Home: 7 IP, 1.29 ERA, .136/.200/.182 against
Away: 7.1 IP, 2.45 ERA, .160/.192/.320 against

I really don't see what he offers over Chris Britton or Ross Ohlendorf, except, possibly, slightly more control. But the Yankees did get a Santana, right? ;-)

2007-12-04 07:17:12
137.   Rob Middletown CT
What he offers is depth - another option, another chance to catch lightning in a bottle. He's a reliever, and one who has had some success. Throw him against the wall and see if he sticks. Best you can do.

William,

Ok. What, exactly, is the package you think the Yankees should give up to get Johan?

2007-12-04 07:17:23
138.   williamnyy23
128 130 He has a very small major league sample size, but he did have an ERA+ of 224 (which is adjusted) in his 14 innings last year. He also had pretty good numbers in the minors last year. If the reports that he has a 95 mph fastball are accurate, I think it's a nice pick-up.

Of course, the best omen for Albaladejo is he was released by the Pirates. That means he HAS TO be good.

2007-12-04 07:17:48
139.   Raf
104 I heard similar on 1010-WINS this morning. My first thought was 'WTF?'

If that's all it takes for the Sox to land Santana, color me surprised...

2007-12-04 07:19:04
140.   Yankee Fan In Boston
138 you just know that bob sheperd is practicing saying "albaladejo" today.
2007-12-04 07:19:26
141.   OldYanksFan
"If, however, you think Santana wont be traded to Boston (I think he will) and that he isn't more likely to outpitch Hughes and Kennedy over the next 3 years (I assume he will outpitch just about everyone over the next 3 years) or so, well, then I think you are way off base."

William, look how Cashman/Yankees has been playing the game for the last 3 years. Very few BFOG aquisitions, keeping and promoting kids, building the farm big time.

If they started doing this in 2000, we would not be 'behind' Boston now. You may be right about THIS deal, but the Yankees need to continue their current philosophy.

If the kids are a bust, or only average, well... I guess we will have learned a painful lesson. I'm just saying I think we need to see how well we develop, promote and use our own.

And while Pitching may be the most important element is baseball, there are still MANY impact players that will make the team better. I am not counting on CC, or Bedard, or MCab, or anyone else. I'm counting on Cashman always willing to spend and make good deals to improve the team with any one of a number of quality players we might ge in the next year or 2.

Again, I don't know how much value to out into WinShares, but ARod and MCab both were 50% better then Santana (33 to 22 over 3 years). Beltran was better. A number of players were.

Winning is NOT about 'the best pitcher in baseball'. Santana and Pedro are GREATs, but not enough by themselves.

It is about a balanced combination of + or ++ pitching, offense and defense.

2007-12-04 07:19:34
142.   Sliced Bread
122 "The bigger ballpark and market doesn't make NY the bigger stage."

Uh, yes it does -- and we're talking about the present, not the past.

We're also talking about endorsement potential, as Shaun notes 129 .

Look, if Santana wants to accept less than what the Yanks and NY have to offer, and become a Red Sock, he's not worth talking about.

2007-12-04 07:22:25
143.   Yankee Fan In Boston
142 "Look, if Santana wants to accept less than what the Yanks and NY have to offer, and become a Red Sock, he's not worth talking about."

great line.

it is the twins who will be deciding where he ends up though. i think he'll take the loot regardless of where it comes from. i could be wrong though.

2007-12-04 07:22:48
144.   Shaun P
133 "If Horne is really a bonafide starting prospect, shouldn't that make IPK more expendable?"

Absolutely! But as long as teams think the Yanks might be willing to move Hughes or Horne, why settle for IPK? The number of GMs who can be had now is tiny. It'd be another story altogether if guys like Dave Littlefield, Cam Bonifay, Chuck LaMarr, Syd Thrift, etc were still running teams, but they aren't.

"It's great that the Yankees have so many good young arms, but are they all going to pan out?"

Probably not, but again, its very easy to identify the guys who have the most upside and are the most likely to pan out. The guys who aren't on that list (ex: Tyler Clippard) are not going to fetch a front-line starter in return.

2007-12-04 07:25:26
145.   williamnyy23
137 I would love to save Hughes as much as everyone...to do that, I think I'd do something like Horne, Kennedy, Melky and Tabata.

Unfortunately, I think the Twins would rightly hold out for Hughes. If that was the case, I'd offer them Hughes, Melky and Horne/Tabata/Jackson (and even Kennedy if my scouts advised me that IPK wasn't the real deal...it's funny, but IPK strikes me as last year's Tyler Clippard).

The problem with proposing a deal is I don't have access to the advanced scouting reports and medical records that I'm sure the Yankees have on their prospects. That's why I am not explicitly saying the Yankees have to go after Santana...if they strongly feel like IPK and Hughes are the real deal, then I can accept that. My only point is they had better be right, or have a plan B if they are not.

2007-12-04 07:29:05
146.   Rob Middletown CT
I think IPK is clearly a cut above Clippard. He's got a little extra on his FB, and he's got better command.

Having said that...

Hughes, Melky and Horne/Tabata/Jackson.

For clarity - 3 players total, or 4? Because the deal the twins rejected was Hughes + Melky + ?? (a minor leaguer who was probably in the Horne/Jackson/Tabata group) - instead demanding either 4 players, or Kennedy included with Hughes & Melky.

2007-12-04 07:32:42
147.   Yankee Fan In Boston
expect the mitchell report before xmas.

http://tinyurl.com/25gpod

2007-12-04 07:33:17
148.   williamnyy23
141 Santana isn't a BFOG acquisition...he is the best pitcher in baseball acquisition. Also, I don't see how acquiring Santana abandons the Yankees philosophy. Would a rotation of Santana, Wang, Pettitte, Joba and IPK/Horne strike you as one representing a team that doesn't have a sound farm philosophy (especially if the bullpen includes Melancon/Ohlendorf/Sanchez)?

I also don't get your point about learning a lesson? The Yankees aren't the first team to promote from within...there is plenty of precedent of lessons that have been learned regarding prospects. Instead of playing wait and see, the Yankees should be considering these cases in formulating their strategy.

As for the win shares argument, position players should have more than pitchers because they play more games and much more credit for defense. Also, we aren't talking about what acquisition wins us more regular season games (Arod does that nicely), but which one wins us Games 1, 4 and 7.

Finally, you are correct about balance, but the one thing that would balance the team best is the acquisition of a bonafide ace in the midst of his prime.

2007-12-04 07:34:44
149.   mehmattski
If the Red Sox were to deal Lester, Crisp, Lowrie, and Masterson, I don't see how that deal is somehow inferior to what the Yankees were offering (Hughes, Melky and ?)... in fact I think the Red Sox deal is better for the Twins. The reason we may think the Red Sox deal is inferior is because they don't suffer at all for it: Ellisbury slips in for Crisp, Santana in for Lester, and Lowrie and Masterson are blocked for the forseeable future. Not so for Hughes, Melky, and even AJax.
2007-12-04 07:36:17
150.   Mattpat11
148 I'd also argue that the Yankees have still made their share of BFOG (Mientkiewicz) and For No Apparent Reason moves in the last few years.
Show/Hide Comments 151-200
2007-12-04 07:36:21
151.   ny2ca2dc
145 146 The Twins rejected Hughes/Melky/Horne, and want either Hughes/Melky/IPK or Hughes/Melky/Horne/AJax. The latter is way too steep, really. I would go Hughes/Melky/Horne, but not Hughes/Melky/Ajax. If the Sawx are really going to go Lester/Ellsbury/Lowrie/Crisp (which is a good package, and killer if they can substitute Crisp for one more of the Sawx non-Bucholz pitchers), and Hughes/Melky/IPK gets it done, I might do it... But it would be a really, really hard swallow.
2007-12-04 07:36:36
152.   OldYanksFan
134 Common Matt... if St. Louis proved anything, it's that anything can happen. Wang threw TWO crap games in a row and Joba was swarmed by insects. I don't think this will be an annual event.

And our offense wasn't exactly stellar. I guess if they could score 4 runs/game, the bugs might not have been such as big issue.

Really... can we STOP pointing to 1 or 2 players, 1 or 2 games, 1 or 2 situations, and try to draw a 'Rule' from it? There is a huge amount of random luck/fate that factors into any short series. What we do over 162 games in much more an indicator of our quality then is the PS.

If a Zebra had farted in Africa, Meier may not have been at the game to interfer with Jeter's 'HR' and we may not have won that year. The same such fart may have changed the world enough to have Little Giambi slide on the 'flip play', and kill that series for us. It may have also changed the atmospheric pressure enough to have Mo make an accurate DP throw to 2nd base, or have T.Clarke's double NOT bounce into the stands, or effect any of 20 plays that could have had us beating the Sox in 2004.

I have never, never heard Jeter talk about the Yankees 'success' in 1996-2000 without saying 'you got to have luck'. He ALWAYS says that, because it's true.

Can we PLEASE PLEASE stop referring to PS outcomes as an indicator of anything other then that moment?

2007-12-04 07:37:14
153.   JL25and3
132 The last time 93 wins was enough for the AL wild card was 2000.
2007-12-04 07:38:49
154.   williamnyy23
142 That's silly...we aren't talking about endorsement potential (especially because the big endorsements are national anyway); we are talking about center stage in MLB, and that's the team with the most success in a town rabid for baseball. When the Sox are good and the Yankees are bad, Fenway becomes the center stage.

Just because Santana doesn't think the Yankees are the greatest thing since slided bread (pardon the pun) doesn't (pardon the double negative) mean he isn't worth talkign about. I think that last statement betrayed your position, which isn't very objective (and sounds a lot like Hank).

2007-12-04 07:40:42
155.   williamnyy23
146 Actually, the report I read was the 3rd player didn't include any of those names, but instead a mid-range prospect.
2007-12-04 07:41:29
156.   51cq24
152 are you using the fact that there's luck involved to argue that we don't need to have the best possible team? doesn't having the best players still give you the best shot to win in the playoffs, luck or not? if you think having santana on this team wouldn't help our playoff chances, you are definitely wrong.
2007-12-04 07:42:45
157.   Sarasota
Jon Lester, Coco Crisp, Justin Masterson and Jed Lowrie is the standing Red Sox offer. That to me is inferior to Phranchise + Melky.
2007-12-04 07:42:50
158.   Rob Middletown CT
"The last time 93 wins was enough for the AL wild card was 2000."

Um, no. 93 would've gotten it done this year. Did you look up the runner-up's records or the WC winner's records?

2007-12-04 07:44:57
159.   mehmattski
158 Pretty sure the Yankees won 94 games this year.
2007-12-04 07:45:38
160.   williamnyy23
149 Doesn't Santana slip in for Hughes though? Also, if you keep AJax out of the deal, he's your long-term replacement for Melky (a player many here wanted to demote in the first half of last season). So, it basically comes down to not having a replacement for Kennedy (even though many suggest Horne might be that guy).

The reason I think any deal with Hughes is better is he has the most upside and, importantly for the Twins, one less year of service time than Lester. Also, Melky is much better than Crisp (mostly because of their ages). So, unless you are very high on Lowrie and Masterson (which is possible), I don't think the deals are close.

The bottom line Sox fans will think the Yankees offer is paltry, while we think the Sox offer is weak. The reason is we aren't viewing those deals with an emotional attachment to the prospects involved.

2007-12-04 07:45:42
161.   JL25and3
141 You may be right about THIS deal, but the Yankees need to continue their current philosophy.

So...this might actually be a good trade, but it's philosophically undesirable?

I'll take talent over metaphysics any day.

2007-12-04 07:45:54
162.   Rob Middletown CT
Yes, but they could've won 89 games and still have won the WC, IIRC.
2007-12-04 07:45:58
163.   Shaun P
153 Here's to some NL-style parity overtaking the AL then!

145 "if they strongly feel like IPK and Hughes are the real deal, then I can accept that. My only point is they had better be right, or have a plan B if they are not."

My guess is that's exactly how Cashman feels, and plan B involves having all those other pitching prospects (Horne, Marquez, Sanchez, even Brackman) around.

And let's not forget - not trading for Santana is not the end. If he reaches the open market next year, I think the Yanks will make sure he signs with them.

To me, I'd rather have Santana AND Hughes than one or the other. I don't think anyone here would disagree with that. The question is, does he hit the open market?

2007-12-04 07:47:43
164.   williamnyy23
152 When the input is a dominant starting pitcher, post season outcomes becomes less random. If you want a rule, I think that's number one.
2007-12-04 07:48:05
165.   mehmattski
157 Then you are sorely over-estimating Melky Cabrera (and Phil Hughes, to an extent). Even if you assume that Hughes + Melky = Lester + Crisp (arguable, at best), the inclusion of two other players very close to being ready makes that a clear favor for the Red Sox deal.

A Yankees deal comparable to what the Red Sox have offered is Hughes-Melky-Gonzales-Horne, since Lowrie is better than Gonzales.

2007-12-04 07:49:41
166.   Mattpat11
152 I'd really rather our team philosophy not be "Well, anything can happen, so lets pass on building the best team possible"

Part of the reason Chien Ming Wang was even allowed to pitch two shit games was that we didn't have anyone competent enough to pitch game four.

Having "okayish" pitching will probably be enough to get a good offense into the playoffs every year. That's not enough for me.

And the bugs have turned into such a cop out.

2007-12-04 07:50:56
167.   OldYanksFan
156 No. I'm saying to judge who is the better/best team based on the 162 game season, not on the PS... and that the PS is 3 short series and the RCNB plays a big role if the series are close. Matts comment was: "And we were humiliated on the first round of the playoffs when our "good enough" pitching staff fell apart."

Our staff did not fall apart, Wang did. And CC did also. And our offense did also.

The only valid deduction I can make from last year's PS was that we played 'tight', and underperformed, Wang was off, and the bug swamp was as bizarre a way to lose a game as I can imagine.

The fact that we gained 12.5 games on the Sox in the 2nd half (even with a Hughes injury) is more telling to me then 4 games against Cleveland.

2007-12-04 07:51:05
168.   ny2ca2dc
165 In a vacuum, Hughes & Melky are certainly better than Lester & Crisp. If the Twins think otherwise, then a deal ain't happening, bacuase they're out of their minds. At no time could Lester ever be considered in Hughes class, and they've even now got similar big league experience (but not service time, another point in Hughes favor).
2007-12-04 07:52:03
169.   mehmattski
164 Predicted counterpoint from OYF: "Yeah, but look at Santana's PS record- the Twins haven't gone that far."

What a pedantic argument... the best players have the best chance win the most games, period.

162 If you want to build a team to win 89 games, be my guest- I'll be over here building a 95 win team.

2007-12-04 07:52:37
170.   williamnyy23
163 I hate to beat a fallen horse, but there is no way the Red Sox trade for him without an extension. That isn't an option. That's why I keep saying that while I can understand the sentiment to not make the deal, I don't think all of the consequences have been considered. There is no way Santana hits the open market if he is dealt to Boston.
2007-12-04 07:54:58
171.   mehmattski
168 As I said, it's arguable... but the point is that the inclusion of a MLB ready infielder and another pitching prospect pushes the Sox deal ahead of Hughes+Melky.

I've also seen other iterations of that deal that swap in Ellisbury for Masterson. Sorry, but the Yankees can't really compete with that one without Hughes-IPK-Melky.

2007-12-04 07:55:10
172.   ms october
this has been stated before, but it bears repeating. it is important to have a very good farm system for 2 reasons:
1) to have good options to promote to your major league team
2) to have good players to use as trade bait to acquire very good players

i would love to see how the bigr three pans out. but we really don't know how each of them will.
if there is any pitcher in the league that you trade one of them for - it is santana.
after years of not having much of a farm and then trading away what little was in the farm for one guy after another who did not pan out - it is a natural reaction not to want to go down that road again - but santana is different than the others (unit, javy vasquez, kevin brown, etc.)
look at boston's roster - other than pedroia, youk, and paplebon - what homegrown player made a major contribution to them winning the world series this year?
they have made some smart trades and had mixed success with their free agent signings.

163 167 etc - on the packages
i'm unclear on the latest of who is to be included. it seems the twins want 4 players though. it also seems they have only recently agreed to back off asking for ipk as well. it seems they asked for hughes/melky/horne/jackson and the yanks rejected that.
if the yanks only want to swap three players who is the 3rd player?

2007-12-04 07:56:01
173.   Mattpat11
167 And Wang having to pitch two games to begin with isn't a symptom of the problems of a "good enough" pitching staff?
2007-12-04 07:56:29
174.   ny2ca2dc
165 Also, Hughes-Melky-Gonzales-Horne for Santana I could get behind. I wouldn't like it because of Hughes, but if that's what it takes to keep Santana from Boston, then I'd pull that trigger.
2007-12-04 07:57:53
175.   mehmattski
172 I agree with all of that. I'd say that Hughes-Melky-Jackson is the deal the Yankees are looking to make, and need to make in order to stay competitive. I don't believe Hank for a second that the Yankees are really done with trade talks.
2007-12-04 07:58:26
176.   Shaun P
170 "There is no way Santana hits the open market if he is dealt to Boston."

Absolutely right, but in 163 I never said he gets traded to Boston and doesn't sign an extension. To be clear, the only way he hits the open market is (1) the Twins keep him for all of 2008 and (2) he doesn't resign with the Twins.

Right now, I think the odds of that happening are pretty good.

2007-12-04 08:02:51
177.   williamnyy23
174 Be my guest on Alberto...I can't imagine why the Twins would want him.

While I think Hughes will be a successful major league pitcher, I am very suspect of Ian Kennedy. It's so hard to get a feel for a pitcher like him (small in stature) off a few innings. Also, unlike Hughes, IPK really only has 1 year of pro experience (A, AA, AAA and majors all in one season). Something about that worries me.

2007-12-04 08:04:38
178.   markp
Correction: Guidry didn't get into the Yankee rotation until he was 26 because he didn't learn the slider from Lyle until then, and wasn't getting enough guys out without it.

Once again, it's just as likely Santana breaks down as it is any of the kids do. They've all been pitching with innings limits their whole Yankee careers. Why did Johann stop throwing his slider in the second half last year?

Also once again, Hughes doesn't have to be the 25-28 year old Santana to make this trade a bad idea. That might be true if the trade was 1-1. It's pretty far from being 1-1.
Melky's not really as good a player (yet?) as a lot of people make him out to be, but he's our best option in CF by a mile.
Tabata or Jackson are pretty highly rated prospects, and at positions of need.
Horne (as the write up mentioned here on Banter a few days ago shows) may turn out to be a very good MLB pitcher himself-I'd say the odds are at least even on that.
So even if only half of the people we would be giving up reach their potential, the trade is very lopsided in the Twins favor.

This is a classic example of selling low and buying high. If we really feel we have too many prospects, we should at least let them gain some value in the majors before using them in trades.

2007-12-04 08:04:51
179.   Yankee Fan In Boston
boston herald update:
The package of players the Twins receive is still in flux and there are two packages under discussion, with still varying mixes of players in each. The first is left-hander Jon Lester and center fielder Coco Crisp, the other is headed by center field prospect Jacoby Ellsbury. The Red Sox have successfully held the line on not including Ellsbury in a package with either Lester or Clay Buccholz, their other top starter.

The names, in some combo, minus one or two, include starter Justin Masterson and shortstop Jed Lowrie.

...

There is no other team involved in these negotiations, it is believed. There remains a chance that the Yankees could jump back in by agreeing to include Kennedy but it remains to be seen if the Red Sox and Twins are too far down the road for the Yankees to come back. Right now, it appears so.

http://tinyurl.com/2ogtfv

2007-12-04 08:05:21
180.   OldYanksFan
Playing the odds:
Let's remember a few other factors:
1) The Sox might not give enough and Santana stays with the Twins.
2) Santana was EMPHATIC that he did NOT say he would veto a mid-season trade. So maybe Minn. decides to see what happens in the first half (with Santana) and go from there.
3) The Sox get past the Twins but low-ball the cash (5/$110). Santana knows he can get 6/$150 from the Yanks as a FA, and can turn the Sox down.
4) Santana wants to play for the Yanks, and also, doesn't mind the idea of 6/$150

Maybe the odds of any one of those happening is small... but they are still part of the equation. So if the Yankee's trade portion itself had them on the shelf, then these factors might have them backing out.

We should remember that the Yankees are never afraid of chasing and paying the 'big gun' on the market. If they pull out, especially in light that the Sox might get him, they must have pretty strong feelings about this decision.

2007-12-04 08:09:57
181.   OldYanksFan
I don't understand.
If we stay pat, we have the same team that played .600+ baseball once Phil and Joba were on the team. The same team... unless Cashman does something to make us better.
Why 89 wins? Why 93 wins? This is still a very good team right now.

And we will be better by April and better again by August.

2007-12-04 08:10:28
182.   Mattpat11
181 They weren't good enough.
2007-12-04 08:12:10
183.   Rob Middletown CT
Neither was the 2002 team, which won 102 games. Shit happens, unfortunately.
2007-12-04 08:13:08
184.   williamnyy23
178 Aah, so the Yankees were able to determine that by allowing Guidry to pitch 31 innings from 1974-1975?

I'm not sure how you generated your odds, but the fact remains that established major league pitches with 6 year track records of being the best in the league have a much better chance of outperforming prospects, some of whom have 1 or 2 years in pro-ball.

2007-12-04 08:13:40
185.   OldYanksFan
172 Except they might get Santana because of Lester, Buchholz and Ellsbury... all homegrown... so their home grown guys are making a difference, one way of the other.
2007-12-04 08:14:09
186.   Zack
Well, I can't fault the Yankees for not giving into the Twins ridiculous demands, despite my deep desire for having Johan be a yankee. However, the Sox can get away with trading NOBODY that has any immediate future for them.
Lester was their odd man out of the rotation, and was at best their 4th starter in the coming years. Crisp was beyond a spare part. Lowries was blocked. Masterson (who the twins want b/c of his SETUP potential, WTF??) is still a year away, doesn't have great #s, and would be ticketed to the Sox BP.

So they Sox, essentially, can get Santana for nothing but $. Its an absolute steal for them, and I have to think everyone is going to see it that way. Sure, the Sox package has a SS in it, but they have to be kidding themselves if they think Lester and Masterson>Hughes, and Coco>Melky.

Its really amazing that the Yankees were asked to give up three pieces of their current team while the Sox can offer a package (that they offered BEFORE Hughes was included, mind you) that doesn't have ANY impact on them what so ever.

Enjoy fighting the Rays for 2nd place with our competing young and unproven kids (oh wait, the rays rotation actually has more proven young guys than ours does).

2007-12-04 08:15:11
187.   ny2ca2dc
180 That's a good point. I think one thing we've learned is that the Sawx will decide on a price they're willing to pay, and then walk if it's too much (Damon, Pedro, ARod). So even if they get that sweetheart deal from the Twins (Lester/Crisp/Lowrie/P), if Santana's $$ demands are too high, the deal could fall thru. And it's not like the DiceK situation where the player really wants to make the deal, Johan can just wait, and maybe even wait for a mid season trade, or for a resurrection of the Yankees trade scenario.
2007-12-04 08:15:31
188.   Mattpat11
And they tried to improve that team. They failed, but they tried.

We're going into this year with an older version of the team that fell apart last year.

2007-12-04 08:16:02
189.   Zack
181 this is also a team that for every young pitcher being one year older, has a whole lot of vets one year older and most likely worse. Add that to facing a much BETTER Sox team and Rays team, and it will be even harder...

At least the Twins won't be as good...

2007-12-04 08:16:15
190.   ms october
185 yes - exactly - you need talent to (and money) to get specific talent. that's how they got beckett and schilling.
2007-12-04 08:17:11
191.   Zack
187 there is no way, at all, that the Sox let Santana walk. There is a far greater chance that Santana somehow signs a friendly deal, considering the way things have gone for the Sox lately...
2007-12-04 08:17:41
192.   markp
weren't good enough for what? Hasn't the number of really mediocre wild card teams that made to (and even won) the WS taught anyone anything? The postseason doesn't show who the best team is. It shows who the hot team (and often the lucky team) is. Seattle won 116 games one year and got beat by the same Yankee team that the wild card Marlins beat in the WS.

Wang had a lousy couple of games, but even Santana has had bad post-season games. Meanwhile Jeter (Mr November) was horrid, and most of the team didn't do much of anything at the plate.

The trick is getting there-then luck and being hot (or in Wang's case, not being ice cold) take over.

2007-12-04 08:18:13
193.   williamnyy23
181 The point in building a team is not to maintain, but to get better. If the Yankees offense takes a step back (can Arod and Posada better career years?), the bullpen implodes without Joba and young starters struggle, then this team will take a major step back. The one thing that fortifies a team against question marks is having stud players, especially ace pitchers.
2007-12-04 08:19:09
194.   Zack
The other problem is that the Yanks are no probably going to trade Hughes for Haren which would be a massive mistake...
2007-12-04 08:19:17
195.   williamnyy23
185 Great..then so if the Yankees traded their home grown propsects for Santana, you'd be on board? That statement seems to contradict everything you have been saying.
2007-12-04 08:19:20
196.   Rob Middletown CT
Mattpat,

Not quite true.

1. There is upside potential from 2/5 or 3/5 of the rotation (depending on whether or not all of the "big three" are in it).

2. There is upside potential in CF and at 2B, due to youth.

3. They age elsewhere, it's true. And that's a legit worry.

4. Cashman is working on other upgrades (bullpen, bench).

And I don't think it's fair to say the team "fell apart" last year. They made the playoffs and got beaten 3 games to 1 by a good team, with some wacky stuff happening along the way.

2007-12-04 08:21:00
197.   horace-clarke-era
Busy night/morning here. Have to say I'm with william23 on this trade - or non-trade. If it were simply a question of building a team towards some viable future, sure, keep all prospects and watch and enjoy. But I think Yankee fans (and this subset of them) would be kidding ourselves if we tried to argue that way. This team/city/fan base is all about best team on field each year, and have been spoiled because the ownership has tried to deliver that, spending for it.

Cashman has helped a ton by shaping a deep system, and I'll suggest the way to use that deep system is in acquiring top of the line in their prime players. I hate (said this yesterday) losing some of the young vibe and going over the top on payroll, but those who have said 'best pitcher in the game' are right. As are those who point out this is not just NY not getting him, it looks as if it is Boston GETTING him. Much easier to take if he landed in Metsville, say. But this really looks like an either-or two team dance, which is why Minnesota is so strongly positioned.

Also agree with those who note it is not just about winning 93+ games it is going deep into the playoffs - this year. That distorts expectations, and even the running of the team, but it is a fact of life in the Bronx. No?

2007-12-04 08:22:16
198.   ms october
186 that is the hard part to stomach - the difference in what we believe to be more quality given up (as william pointed out, might just be our perception)- but also in how those players will impact the major league team in the future - giving up jackson seems to have a bigger impact as we know we need replacement outfielders next year for sure. this also speaks to the lack of depth in the farm system in the position player side.
2007-12-04 08:22:50
199.   Yankee Fan In Boston
ladies and gentlemen, may present for your viewing pleasure, the 2008 new york yankees!

http://tinyurl.com/2qalqg

2007-12-04 08:26:37
200.   Schteeve
I can't believe that the day has come when I am more annoyed by listening to people talk about Johan Santana than listening to Carlos Santana.
Show/Hide Comments 201-250
2007-12-04 08:31:28
201.   Mattpat11
192 To be champions of the world. Because all the team's deep flaws came back with a VENGEANCE. You can scream luck all you want. If you just say "whatever" when you build a pitching staff, because "Its all luck!" you're probably going to be stuck wondering what the hell happened every year.
2007-12-04 08:32:12
202.   williamnyy23
It seems as if the Sox are now very close to landing the big fish. It sure appears as if the Red Sox have become more aggressive than the Yankees over these past few years.

Assuming the Yankees don't foolishly deal Hughes for someone like Haren, then the Franchise is going to have a boat load of pressure this season. If, god forbid, he and his mates should fizzle (think about the Mets' generation K), this decision could turn out to be a major turning point into the Sox/Yankees cold war.

2007-12-04 08:34:25
203.   hodengott
Yes, the Red Sox would be the heavy favouites to win in 2008.
But how much more fun will it make to beat them.
2007-12-04 08:35:53
204.   Mattpat11
196 And there's also potential for those young pitchers to be just as mediocre as Hughes was this year. And we still don't have a front line starter.

And our attempts to upgrade the bullpen in recent years has left me less than excited. I have no reason to expect that to change.

2007-12-04 08:36:42
205.   Yankee Fan In Boston
203 word.
2007-12-04 08:39:20
206.   OldYanksFan
195 The Sox are ONLY offering 1 of those 3. My point was the Sox have developed 6 players who are having a positive impact on the team. Ms. October only named 3. And they had Hanibel amd Hanley. My point was the Sox have been ahead of the Yanks in player development over the last 5 years (although we may have just caught up).

Look... I am emotional about this and I am no GM. But Cashman doesn't like this deal either. And it's not an issue of 'assessing pitching'. Everyone knows how good Santana is. If this were a no-brainer, Steinbrenner would force the issue. Either way, it's a gamble, and hard to predict the outcome.

2007-12-04 08:39:41
207.   williamnyy23
203 Not much at all...I like being the favorite. Underdogs belong in Boston (at least they used to).
2007-12-04 08:40:00
208.   Zack
It would be fun to beat the Sox if it happens. It will also suck to see them run roughshod over the league, to hear about how amazing that trade was for them since they gave up nothing, and to see the Yanks struggle with a rotation with 2-3 rookies in it and some aging stars.

Don't get me wrong, I love the kids and can't wait to watch them, but Santana going to the Twins, especially for such crap, is a doomsday scenario...

2007-12-04 08:40:13
209.   Shaun P
202 et al

Unless, of course, this is just more posturing by RSPN. Check this article by Jayson Stark:

http://tinyurl.com/34ssou

As far as I can tell, it contains absolutely nothing that wasn't known last night at 2:30AM, except for the stupid quote at the end.

This is the biggest sports story around right now; why not stoke the flame a bit?

2007-12-04 08:40:34
210.   Sarasota
203 205 I'm in
2007-12-04 08:44:29
211.   yankz
200 Nobody's making you.
2007-12-04 08:47:34
212.   OldYanksFan
210 I'm there too!
2007-12-04 08:49:45
213.   yankz
Great. The Bronx Banter spirit can carry the Yankees to a division title! Who needs Santana anyway!

If the Yankees trade Hughes for Haren, that just might be what I need to kick this addiction.

2007-12-04 08:50:08
214.   Mattpat11
And what happens if the Red Sox are the heavy favorites because they're, you know, that good, and our philosophy of "do nothing" leaves them with another world title and us with our dicks in our hands?
2007-12-04 08:52:05
215.   Mattpat11
213 The idea that we can will this team to win has been around for some time. I've been told many times that if I just supported Pavano or Farnsworth they would turn into competent baseball players.

If the Yankees trade Hughes for Haren, it will lead to an addiction for me.

2007-12-04 08:53:58
216.   markp
williamnyy23
Do you really think Guidry only pitched 31 innings up to 1976? He pitched 301 innings in the minors from 1971 to 1974. He had a 5.26 ERA in AA in '74, which is pretty bad.
He was a little more effective in 75, but as late as 77 was offered to the Blue Jays for Bill Singer (the Jays said no). I wonder what Banter folks would say about trading a guy with an 0-1 MLB record for Bill Singer...
It's pretty common knowledge that he was driving home, ready to give up becoming a big league pitcher when his wife convinced him to give it one more shot.
It's also pretty common knowledge that he wasn't effective with that straight fastball until Lyle taught him the slider.
I don't know why anyone would think the Yankees weren't aware of him pitching in their own minor leagues until 1977. They were.
The original point stands-Guidry (and Wang) didn't become effective MLB pitchers until they were 25 (or more in Gator's case.)
2007-12-04 08:56:31
217.   Yankee Fan In Boston
213 215 if the trade with the tigers was offered, you're both safe.

http://tinyurl.com/2bm6yb

2007-12-04 08:56:33
218.   YankeeInMichigan
153 89 wins was enough for the AL Wild Card in 2007. 88 would have earned a 2-tier playoff with Detroit and Seattle.
2007-12-04 08:57:41
219.   Mattpat11
218 So lets shoot for 88 then.
2007-12-04 08:58:04
220.   Sarasota
214 then you get creative and beat off exhuberantly.
2007-12-04 08:59:27
221.   JL25and3
200 Why would you get annoyed listening to Carlos Santana?
2007-12-04 09:00:57
222.   hodengott
213 Of course, I'd like Santana to pitch for the Yankees. But not for the price of Phil Hughes.
Haren, btw, won't be better than Hughes outside of McAfee Coliseum, and I guess Cash knows that.
2007-12-04 09:02:02
223.   Mattpat11
221 Maybe Santana 2007.
2007-12-04 09:02:38
224.   Mattpat11
222 Hughes damn well better be the next Rocket then.
2007-12-04 09:06:24
225.   JL25and3
218 That's entirely fallacious. No, 89 wins wasn't enough to win the wild card, because the Yankees won 94. If they'd only won 89 games, there's nothing to say that would have been enough.

Never mind Michael Kay's Fallacy of the Predetermined Outcome, which is true but unnecessary. If the Yankee won 89 games, those 5 wins would have gone somewhere, and you don't get to choose where they go.

The fact remains that 93 wins usually won't get a wild card.

2007-12-04 09:06:33
226.   hodengott
224 But Santane won't be the next Rocket from age 29 to 35 either.
2007-12-04 09:07:21
227.   YankeeInMichigan
213 215
VORP SNLVAR ERA+
Santana (2007) 57.7 6.3 130
Haren (2007) 56.4 6.3 137

Granted, Santana has far more dominant seasons on his resume, but was 2007 (a) an "off-year", (b) a "leveling off" or (c) the start of a decline? If the answer is (b) or (c), then Haren is more valuable, since he is younger and cheaper.

2007-12-04 09:08:13
228.   JL25and3
I'd rather trade Hughes for Santana than trade Kennedy for Haren.
2007-12-04 09:08:30
229.   williamnyy23
216 I think I clearly stated that he pitched 31 MAJOR LEAGUE innings.

While Guidry did struggle in 77 innings in AA during the 1974 season, he was much more than "a little more effective in 1975". Promoted to AAA, Guidry had a 2.90ERA with a K/9 OF 11 in 60+ innings. At that point, I'd say it was clear Guidry had emerged as a prospect.

In 1975, Guidry was promoted and threw a solid, above average 16 innings. His reward in 1976 was to return to AAA, where he put up a 0.68 ERA and 11.25 K/9 in 40 innings. Those numbers are outstanding!. Unfortunately, Guidry was only given 16 more innings that season. If you think that was a fair chance, well, what can I say.

The famous story of Guidry heading home was due to his frustration with the Yankees not giving him a chance, not an indication of his struggles.

As to my original point, Guidry first full season (1977) was delayed by the Yankees because they refused to give him the chance that his 1975 and 1976 minor league numbers suggested he deserved. I enjoy a good history lesson, but it's better when it's accurate.

2007-12-04 09:08:59
230.   Mattpat11
227 Baseball happened before 2007.

226 I'll be fine with Johan Santana.

2007-12-04 09:10:52
231.   Adrian
200 Seconded. I think the Yankees are doing the right thing. If the Twins want 4 players, they're going to get IPK, Melky, and a good prospect + a not-so-good prospect. Or they can have Hughes, Melky and a not-so-good prospect.

The problem I have with the Will/Matt/Matt philosophy is that there's no such thing as certainty in baseball, and the philosophy they espouse can quickly lead to mortgaging the future for the hype of the moment.

Lastly, I still have fond memories of the fact that even when we were sucking as hard as we could last year, we still played our hearts out against the Sox. The rivalry motivates the players as much as it does the fans, and we're all familiar with the danger that comes with assuming you're the best. Whatever happens, I'm not worried.

Don't assume that the Sox's dominating performance in the PS = their season average. We'll get to them.

2007-12-04 09:11:23
232.   YankeeInMichigan
226 Rocket himself had only 3 dominant seasons between ages 29 and 35 (29, 34 and 35). In fact, the only pitcher I can think of who was dominant in his 20s and maintained his level through is early 30s was Greg Maddox.
2007-12-04 09:12:40
233.   JL25and3
227 You're also assuming that 137 is Haren's genuine level. Better than comparing 130 to 137 would be this:

Santana: 155, 161, 130
Haren: 117, 108, 137

And Haren's only two years younger, not exactly a generational difference. I would bet that, 5 years from now, Santana is still considerably better than Haren.

2007-12-04 09:14:05
234.   Ken Arneson
222 Yes, Oakland was the 2nd-hardest MLB park to score, but Minnesota was 3rd, so the difference in park factors between Santana and Haren isn't much.
2007-12-04 09:15:36
235.   Mattpat11
231 And believing misplaced hype kills the present and the future.
2007-12-04 09:16:17
236.   williamnyy23
231 You are correct...there is no such thing as certainity, but 29 year old pitchers who have rated as the best in the game over the past 6 seasons comes close, especially when compared to 21 and 22 year old pitchers (esp. Kennedy who has one lone year in pro ball). When you acquire someone like Santana, you don't mortgage your future; you put a down payment down on it.
2007-12-04 09:17:00
237.   JL25and3
231 The problem I have with the Will/Matt/Matt philosophy is that there's no such thing as certainty in baseball, and the philosophy they espouse can quickly lead to mortgaging the future for the hype of the moment.

But you're asssuming that the future they're "mortaging" is more certain than the "hype of the moment."

I'd also dispute the terms. Santana is no hype, he's the real thing. And the depth of young pitching they have ensures that they're not denuding the system.

They will have to trade some young pitching sooner or later. The trick is to get the best return for it.

2007-12-04 09:20:27
238.   Bama Yankee
All this talk about Hughes vs. Santana makes me want to have them both. Could we do that by offering a deal that includes Robinson Cano (I know he is untouchable, but so was Hughes)?

How about Cano/Melky/Kennedy + lower level prospect (if necessary) for Santana?

Imagine going into the playoffs with a rotation that would be:
Santana/Wang/Pettitte/Hughes
(we could then use Joba as the 2 inning setup guy)

I would then sign Rowand to play CF and give Betemit a shot a 2B (or heck, you could just sing Eckstein... would that make him Heckstein?).

I'm not sure the Twins would go for it, but I would give it a shot. To me, the best pitcher in the league + the best pitching prospect in the league > a potential best 2b in the league.

2007-12-04 09:20:59
239.   williamnyy23
232 Clemens was also dominant in his age-31 season (1994; ERA+ of 177) and very good in his age 33 season (1996; ERA+ of 139). So, in the 7 years from 1992 to 1998, Clemens was dominant in 4 seasons, very good in 1, good in 1 and league average in another. That's pretty darn good.

Also, by age 29, Maddux best seasons were behind him, while Clemens had many more to go.

2007-12-04 09:21:23
240.   Adrian
Foolhardy Prediction Alert: 3 kids have league average years, while Santana declines noticeably in Fenway and Sox are saddled with a 5-6 year NTC albatross.
2007-12-04 09:21:35
241.   YankeeInMichigan
229 I don't recall any hype regarding Guidry in '75 and '76. The only prospect hype that I remember was regarding Dave Pagan's 100 MPH heater.
2007-12-04 09:21:55
242.   Shaun P
224 Its funny you said that.

That last guy to go through his minor league career (prior to becoming an established starter) and post a K/9, BB/9, and HR/9 as ridiculous as Phil Hughes did in the minors was, as best as I can tell, Roger Clemens. (Admittedly Clemens did it in 127.7 innings compared to Hughes' 275).

Obviously their situations are much different - eg, Clemens was a great collegiate pitcher; Hughes never played college ball - to say nothing of the league contexts; maybe that skews the numbers, I don't know.

But, and you can call my crazy if you want, I think its reasonably possible that Phil Hughes could be the next Rocket. If I was going to bet on anyone, looking at all the minor league numbers has convinced me to bet on Hughes.

2007-12-04 09:22:41
243.   Rob Middletown CT
I, for one, am not hysterical about "mortaging the future." If the deal is right, I'd make it.

I'm against the inclusion of Phil Hughes in the deal. I was fine with parting with Kennedy, Melky, and some others. Minny will not accept such a package. Ok, fine, I'm done then.

I'm ok with trading prospects... in the right deal. For me, Hughes + Melky + Kennedy or Horne+Jackson is simply too much.

2007-12-04 09:24:35
244.   williamnyy23
241 Hype isn't the issue...by 1975, the Yankees had enough evidence to suggest Guidry deserved a legitimate shot, yet he only recorded 31 ML innings heading into 1977 (wheh he was 26).
2007-12-04 09:24:55
245.   Mattpat11
240 So we'll have three okayish starters and Santana will struggle in Fenway Park.
2007-12-04 09:27:56
246.   YankeeInMichigan
238 I disagree on two counts: (a) Pitchers have a much greater risk of decline or injury than position players. (b) Up-the-middle position players who are strong on offense and defensive are rare (i.e. you need to hold onto them unless you have someone to replace them).

The Yankees have a number of pitchers in their system who can be 80% of Santana. It's tough to find a second baseman who is 80% of Cano.

2007-12-04 09:28:51
247.   williamnyy23
242 If you believe that (and it's not totally unreasonable), then you have strong gorund to stand on. Basically, you are saying that over the next 5 years, Hughes will almost be as good as Santana, if not better. I presume Cashman feels that way too, based on his CY Young comments.

Here's my problem though...if you are willing to deal Hughes and that potential for Santana, why would IPK hold up the deal?

2007-12-04 09:30:33
248.   Mattpat11
246 I draw the line at Cano.
2007-12-04 09:30:56
249.   williamnyy23
246 Cano should remain untouchable...he is the youngest member of an aging offense who also plays great defense. Even if he doesn't improve, he is an all-star caliber potential. Now, just think what would about if he can manage to eke out 20 more walks each year while learning to hit in the cold?
2007-12-04 09:32:46
250.   williamnyy23
I wonder if there is any way to get Fuentes?
Show/Hide Comments 251-300
2007-12-04 09:33:14
251.   Bronxer
From Rob Neyer's ESPN Chat on why Boston's offer is better than the Yankee offer:

"You're leaving out Jed Lowrie, who would probably be a part of any deal with the Red Sox. Lowrie's the real prize"

2007-12-04 09:33:24
252.   hodengott
247 OK. You are right. We shouldn't make a deal centering around IPK too.
2007-12-04 09:33:26
253.   ChuckM
247 Because it's bad enough when you trade away one starting pitcher who winds up being good (and cheap) for the next 5 years, it's even worse when you trade away 2 of them...
2007-12-04 09:33:53
254.   Bama Yankee
249 Yeah, but imagine if Hughes turns out to be a #1 starter and Santana continues to be the best pitcher in the league. Would it matter what kind of offense we get out of our 2b-man?
2007-12-04 09:35:14
255.   YankeeInMichigan
244 I wasn't arguing with you on this one -- just pointing out a curious fact. Statistics may suggest that Guidry was the best pitcher in the system, but I don't think that the organization recognized him as such. The media certainly did not.

Clearly, the hype on Pagan was grossly misplaced, as not only Guidry but also Syracuse teamates and co-tradees MacGregor and Martinez when on stardom.

2007-12-04 09:36:15
256.   Mattpat11
254 I don't believe in punting any position in the batting order. Its why I didn't enjoy watching the likes of Crosby, Wilson and Mientkiewicz.
2007-12-04 09:39:32
257.   OldYanksFan
Can we maybe agree on a few things and stop beating them into the ground?

0) Can we agree that ANY player can get hurt, ANY player can fall off a cliff, and ANY 30+ year pitcher MIGHT decline OR MIGHT maintain, and we really can't prdict with accuracy those things for Phil, Joba or Santana?

If so, it's not really rational for our discussions, but rather stating the obvious.

1) Santana has been and is now better then Haren.
2) Haren is still a very good pitcher and an asset to a team
3) Haren is NOT worth trading Phil... and if Phil was 'just barely' offered for Santana, I can't imagine him being offerend for Haren.
4) Including the FA class of 2009, there are some very good pitchers (not as good as Santana but) who may be avilable to the Yankees via trade or FA... that will make our team better.
5) That those of us who want to keep Phil are driven somewhat by emotion, but that doesn't mean it's dumb, or can't end up being a better choice over 5 years, especially when cost is consided.

Are those thoughts radical? Are they a fair (close to) consensus?

2007-12-04 09:40:19
258.   Bama Yankee
256 My plan would be an offensive upgrade in CF (Rowand over Melky) and Betemit at 2B would obviously be a downgrade, but he would not be punting the position in the batting order, IMO.

Not to mention that we would have both Santana and Hughes in the rotation for the next five years.

2007-12-04 09:42:17
259.   williamnyy23
253 That wasn't the point...my argument was that it would be hard for the Yankees to claim Hughes might be the next Rocket if they were willing to trade him in the first place.

254 You do need offense too and the Yankees bats are aging quickly. I wouldn't trade away that centerpiece, especially when pitching depth is the farm's depth. I'd rather have Hughes/Cano or Santana/Cano than Hughes/Santana.

255 I wasn't arguing with your point either...just pointing out that Guidry was ready for the majors before 1977, hype or not.

2007-12-04 09:43:06
260.   Mattpat11
257 Aside from Sabathia, I saw a group of men that I wouldn't touch with a ten foot pole in the 09 free agent market.
2007-12-04 09:44:31
261.   Mattpat11
258 I'm not positive Rowand will be an upgrade over Cabrera.
2007-12-04 09:44:53
262.   hodengott
257
1)Yes
2)Yes
3)YES !!
4)Yes
5)Yes
2007-12-04 09:46:08
263.   hodengott
260 Than you have to get closer than eleven foot.
2007-12-04 09:46:39
264.   williamnyy23
257 I can't agree with those assumptions because it ignores the relevance of track record. A 29 year old pitcher who has been healthy and excellent is much more likely to remain so than an injury prone vet or an unproven rookie.

Also, the 2008/9 FA class is undefined, so it can't be factored in, especially because teams are more likely to trade their stars then let them walk.

Finally, there is nothing wrong with emotion, but it isn't a sound way to make a logical decision. Sure, any move might work out in theory, but the objective should be to coldly analyze the possible outcomes and make an informed decision on that basis.

2007-12-04 09:50:38
265.   Bama Yankee
161 Okay, how about this deal (I have been working on this one just for you):

Cano/Melky/Kennedy/Farnsworth/mid-level prospect
for
Santana and Nathan

Farns could close for them and getting rid of him would be addition by subtraction for the Yanks.

Would you go for it?

2007-12-04 09:52:14
266.   Bama Yankee
265 Of course, by 161 I meant 261 ...
2007-12-04 09:52:37
267.   Mattpat11
263 Who impresses you in that group?
2007-12-04 09:52:41
268.   williamnyy23
265 That's tempting, but there is no way the Twins would accept that. The only very attracitve player would be Cano.
2007-12-04 09:54:33
269.   Bama Yankee
268 Yeah, but Farnsworth throws a hundred miles per hour... ;-)
2007-12-04 09:55:15
270.   Mattpat11
269 SHHHHHHHHHH

You'll just make the Yankees think he's worth keeping.

2007-12-04 09:56:19
271.   JL25and3
257 As I said before - and as Mattpat says here - it's time to stop looking at next year's FA crop as some significant improvement. If Santana or Sabathia hits free agency, that's one thing. But after that, nada.

Haren is a good pitcher with one excellent year. Beane will demand plenty for him. I'd be very surprised if you could get him for anything less than Kennedy + Melky - and at that point, I'd much rather make the Santana trade.

2007-12-04 09:58:37
272.   JL25and3
266 Watch out, or you might just go 134
2007-12-04 09:59:25
273.   williamnyy23
Here's another point to consider...even if Phil Hughes is just as good as Santana over the next 5 years, it would still make sense to make the deal (assuming, as I believe, money isn't an issue). Under that scenario, the Yankees would get a stud, and the Red Sox would not. If the Yankees get Hughes and the Sox get Santana, then both teams would come out even.
2007-12-04 09:59:40
274.   Bama Yankee
270 Cashman has already said as much (only a smoke screen, I hope).
2007-12-04 10:00:36
275.   Shaun P
264 "the objective should be to coldly analyze the possible outcomes and make an informed decision on that basis."

I agree. While I'd be upset if the Yanks did trade Hughes (for anyone), my reasons for keeping Hughes are the data I mentioned in 242 (hereafter, Hughes' "tremendous upside potential") coupled with his incredibly cheap cost for the next ten years vs. the huge cost (in dollars and players) of acquiring Santana for six or seven years. I am also OK with missing the playoffs in 2008, if that's a byproduct of the development of the kid pitchers.

Obviously, those who want to trade for Santana weigh things differently.

2007-12-04 10:01:23
276.   williamnyy23
Now things are getting wild. From Rotoworld:

SI.com's Jon Heyman believes the Red Sox will enhance their offer for Johan Santana on Tuesday afternoon in order to get a deal done.

Perhaps that means one more prospect will go the other way. First baseman Lars Anderson, right-hander Michael Bowden and outfielder Ryan Kalish would have to be at the top of Minnesota's list if it's going to be a 5-for-1 deal. They're not expected to give the Twins both Jon Lester and Jacoby Ellsbury.

2007-12-04 10:01:50
277.   Bama Yankee
272 LOL... or do you know something that I don't know (suddenly, I don't feel so good)... ;-)

273 Good point.

2007-12-04 10:02:27
278.   hodengott
267 Actually only CC. But I couldn't resist.
2007-12-04 10:03:18
279.   Mattpat11
278 I like CC alot, but I don't think he'll make it to free agency.
2007-12-04 10:03:30
280.   Ken Arneson
271 The A's don't want Melky.
2007-12-04 10:09:07
281.   vockins
If the Giants are shopping Lincecum, and it seems that they are, that's the right hander I'd go for and he'd likely be had for less than what Beane would demand for Haren.

Perhaps Damon would go? A man can dream...

2007-12-04 10:10:33
282.   JL25and3
280 The names might be wrong, but I'll stand by the point. The package for Haren would be big, big enough that I'd rather just trade for Santana.
2007-12-04 10:10:56
283.   Yankee Fan In Boston
281 can two men dream? would that cross any lines?
2007-12-04 10:15:31
284.   Yankee Fan In Boston
283 it did, didn't it? sorry.
...

you guys catch that football game?

2007-12-04 10:15:45
285.   vockins
283 I think it's safe.

Damon throwing from "triples alley" or whatever they call it, that would be grim.

2007-12-04 10:16:05
286.   Mattpat11
281 Is there reason to think Lincecum is going to be significantly better than Hughes?
2007-12-04 10:16:34
287.   Mattpat11
286 Nevermind. I missed the Damon part.
2007-12-04 10:20:25
288.   vockins
286 Hughes, take a walk. Melky and Gonz - done.
2007-12-04 10:23:22
289.   Shaun P
276 Hmph.

264 "I can't agree with those assumptions because it ignores the relevance of track record. A 29 year old pitcher who has been healthy and excellent is much more likely to remain so than an injury prone vet or an unproven rookie."

I'm not so sure of that. The Yanks have handled Hughes very carefully; for example, he wasn't allowed to throw his curveball for a couple of years. His little injuries here and there have also significantly reduced the amount of mileage on his arm for ages 18-21 (total IP: 347.7). As long as he's not over-extended the next 2-3 years, I think he might have better odds of staying healthy than Santana does.

Yes, so far Santana has held up under a very large workload - 912.3 IP over the last 4 years - but that mileage plus the "he didn't throw his slider after August 1 pain" make me worry a lot. Enough to weigh the injury risk in Hughes's direction.

2007-12-04 10:27:21
290.   OldYanksFan
264 So William, you CAN predict with accurancy whether or not Santana and Phil will produce much less then expected due to injury?

I didn't guarantee specifically WHO would be on that list, although I think there are people who's contact is up after 2008, and have a decent chance of being on said list. Do you believe there will be a list (as opposed to none)? Do you believe there will be some quality players on that list (if there is a list)?

I absolutely agree. But when you have many variables, and much is guess work, and there are many different factors involved which as also guesswork, the analytical process might end up being guess work.

There is tons on evidence that pitcher of Santana's history degrade aroud 30. There is tons on evidence that pitcher of Santana's history continue to be effective well after 30. There are tons of excellent prospects who have failed, and many who have succeeded.
How much weight do you give to 2008? To 2009? Beyond? How much stock do you put into getting someone else? How much weight goes to financial considerations? Past experiences that have not worked out?

You should play the odds IF you know the odds. But sometimes it takes years for the odds to even out. Is a longshot at 20:1 better then best bet at 3:1?

The only thing I feel pretty strongly about it NOT getting Santana is based on a bigger upside after 2008, or 2009, as opposed to 2008.

There is also the factor that with our offense we can still win 100 games with a team ERA 0.5 higher then a team with average offense.

I confess that I am influenced by Winshares... and even Winshares per $$. I think great pitching holds a slight edge over great offense, but there are many ways to put together a winning team.

2007-12-04 10:32:07
291.   williamnyy23
290 Can I predict with accuracy? Of course not, but I think it's pretty obvious that a longer track record makes predictions much easier and more accurate.
2007-12-04 10:32:14
292.   Mattpat11
290 Again, assuming Sabathia doesn't make it to free agency, who in that field excites you?

And there are many ways to build a winning team. We've tried "eh pitching" without success for several years now.

2007-12-04 10:33:16
293.   williamnyy23
290 I also disagree with your notion that their is tons of evidence about pitchers like Santana because there haven't been tons of pitchers like him.
2007-12-04 10:50:57
294.   Schteeve
221 Because his over saturated, squishy high end is offensive to my ears.
2007-12-04 10:50:57
295.   Schteeve
221 Because his over saturated, squishy high end is offensive to my ears.
2007-12-04 10:54:14
296.   mehmattski
295 One could snort sardonically that if it takes Rob Thomas to get you a #1 hit, maybe the talent isn't there.

I, personally, would not say that, but one could.

2007-12-04 10:55:46
297.   Schteeve
211 Oh really? How do you know? As a matter of fact, since late May, Alex has been standing over my shoulder, ominously slapping a crowbar into his palm.

Seriously though, I come here to read intelligent discourse about the Yankees. What has been going on in the comments for the last week has been re-hashed argument after re-hashed argument about whether or not Johan Santana will prove to be worth sacrificing Phil Hughes.

The answer is probably yeah, but very possibly not. We can't impact it, and nobody truly knows the answer. So reading the same arguments over and over has gotten a bit tedious, and I finally had enough to make one inocuous (unless you are Carlos Santana and/or his guitar tech) comment about my level of fed-upness.

Yeah I don't have to read it, you don't have to respond, blah blah blah, I get it. I voiced my opinion just like everyone is voicing theirs. Difference is, I didn't repeat it 14 times in the last 6 days.

2007-12-04 11:02:05
298.   Yankee Fan In Boston
296 ah, but mr. thomas' involvement in any #1 hit instantly negates any positive status a #1 hit would have carried up until that point.
2007-12-04 11:17:17
299.   OldYanksFan
297 Finally... a logical conclusion.
P.S. I don't recommend looking at the comments at Lohud!
2007-12-04 11:24:02
300.   Yankee Fan In Boston
299 crap.

thanks a lot.

Show/Hide Comments 301-350
2007-12-04 11:41:10
301.   Marcus
Pettite making noises about playing longer than just next year:

http://tinyurl.com/35zmv6

"One of the main [reasons] this was such a tough decision for me, one year could lead to another, maybe. For the main reason, if I'm healthy and if my family wanted to support it again, we would consider it, but also the Yankees are going to have a new stadium. I know down the road, when we get through this season, that will be in the back of my head also. That would be awfully nice, to play in that new stadium."

2007-12-04 11:43:20
302.   NJYankee41
It seems to me that the Red Sox situation right now is very similar to where the Yankees were a couple of days ago. On Friday the inclusion of Hughes sounded like it was going to do it until the Twins kept asking for more. Now the Sox have a deal that seems destine to be accepted only to have the Twins ask for a little more here and a little more there. The biggest difference is the media making a bigger deal out of the Sox chances.

Also over at COH Mike Plugh had a great quote, "Trading away any of our top prospects for Haren is a sure fire way of making the Javier Vazquez mistake all over again."

I have to agree with that statement. Haren is good and has shown signs of being an ace, but is he really the sure thing we are looking for?

2007-12-04 11:46:25
303.   Mattpat11
302 I've been calling him Vazquez for a while now. Hopefully the Yankees realize that baseball happened before last year. They've had problems determining that in the past.
2007-12-04 11:46:46
304.   williamnyy23
302 It looks like Haren is headed to Arizona, so hopefully we wont have to worry about that happening.
2007-12-04 11:49:10
305.   RIYank
Jonathan "Johan" Santana Joe Yorvit Jessica Torrealbaladejo.

Five great humans rolled into one!

2007-12-04 11:52:33
306.   NJYankee41
304 Really? Any details on that?
2007-12-04 11:54:15
307.   williamnyy23
306 It was one of those ESPN rumors the last time I checked. The name Carlos Gonzalez was involved, so that's what made me think it was serious.
2007-12-04 11:57:51
308.   Yankee Fan In Boston
304 306 307 here's the arizona/haren rumor:

http://tinyurl.com/yqwfoj

2007-12-04 11:58:18
309.   Shaun P
307 If Beane gets some future impact hitting back for Haren, that could be a win-win for both sides. Beane holds off on competing for a couple of years, Arizona gets the pitching it desperately needs now.

297 I didn't realize it, but you're exactly right about the repeated arguments. Thanks for pointing it out.

2007-12-04 12:01:56
310.   williamnyy23
309 When an issue is hot like this, you are always going to get repeated arguments (or arguments slightly restated to respond to a variety of different replies). I think that comes with the territory of a blog (or any forum for that matter).
2007-12-04 12:02:53
311.   williamnyy23
Geez...I hope the Orioles are going to get a lot more than Broxton and Kemp (although, now that I think about it, it'll be nice to see the Orioles cement their doormat status).

The Orioles and Dodgers may be close on a deal that will send left-hander Erik Bedard to Los Angeles, a baseball source said. The O's are in need of a center fielder and a closer who can play at the major league level, and the Dogders seem willing to part with outfielder Matt Kemp and reliever Jonathan Broxton, who could come in a close in lieu of Chris Ray, out for the year after Tommy John surgery. "They want Bedard bad," said the source.

2007-12-04 12:07:54
312.   Yankee Fan In Boston
chin up, people.

the angels are getting in on santana.

http://tinyurl.com/2oogzy

2007-12-04 12:20:49
313.   NJYankee41
312 Wow, I could see a Weaver and Wood package getting something done if thats what the Angels want to do. A young gun and a third baseman they have been seeking. This Santana ordeal isn't going to end anytime soon is it?
2007-12-04 12:23:34
314.   standuptriple
My goodness. The NL West could be pretty wild with Bedard added to Torre's troupe and Webb/Haren in AZ. If that goes down I would not want to be in the Giants shoes.
2007-12-04 12:30:23
315.   Yankee Fan In Boston
and now peter abraham is saying the dodgers want to talk about santana. they could put a nice offer together.
2007-12-04 12:33:24
316.   Yankee Fan In Boston
espn says dodgers are close to getting bedard.

http://tinyurl.com/2n5nyv

there goes that idea.

2007-12-04 12:52:52
317.   standuptriple
ESPN says a lot these days...like a coach had accepted a job then he came out and blatently claimed it to be false. I'll wait until I see an actual release from a team before I get exceited about their "facts" thank you very much.
2007-12-04 13:19:48
318.   Yankee Fan In Boston
317 having such standards completely saps this time of year of all the fun.
2007-12-04 13:26:55
319.   Shaun P
318 It does help one's blood pressure though.
2007-12-04 13:27:44
320.   yankz
How is Johan going to the Angels chin up? They own us more than any other team.

And waiting for a free agent is beyond stupid. As mehmattski has said, a bird in the hand, and all that jazz. Especially when that bird is the king of all birds, Johan Santana.

Meanwhile, there's no guarantee anymore that the Yankees can get whatever FA they want. Every team has money now, and we've seen recently guys turning down the Yankees.

2007-12-04 13:32:09
321.   yankz
WasWatching actually had to do some (pretty unimpressive) number crunching to convince people that Hughes is better than Lester?
2007-12-04 13:32:52
322.   Adrian
318 Exactly. We're not looking for empirical truth at this stage of the game. We're looking to imbibe the heady liquor of speculation, outrage and rumor. And maybe, once we've gotten good and toasted, see if we can lure a quality "position player" home with us.
2007-12-04 13:36:18
323.   standuptriple
322 It's more similar to being downwind from a coffee shop in Amsterdam I think.
2007-12-04 13:41:32
324.   Yankee Fan In Boston
320 people were conceding the division to the sox. they were preparing mentally to have to watch beckett and santana face the yankees 12 times next season.

having santana on the other coast might have been a welcome alternative to some.

plus, if the angels get the twins' attention, they could at least raise the asking price on the sox. make it hurt a bit.

that was the origin of the raised chins.

2007-12-04 13:45:29
325.   JL25and3
295 Fair enough. I still like the first two albums, and haven't listened to much of anything he's done since. I think that makes it easier.

297 Is not! Is too! Is not! Is too!

I'm with you. I don't know if this horse is dead, but it was coughing up blood last night.

2007-12-04 13:45:51
326.   Yankee Fan In Boston
324 (i don't expect the 12 game match up, but that was the number mentioned earlier.)
2007-12-04 13:46:26
327.   Mattpat11
324 I think the Red Sox are still a better team regardless. The onus was on the Yankees to get better. The Red Sox were sitting pretty.
2007-12-04 13:50:24
328.   51cq24
327 what makes the sox a better team regardless?
2007-12-04 13:52:51
329.   51cq24
328 nevermind i thought you meant that the sox have improved from 07. i still question how much better the sox are than the yankees though, even last year.
2007-12-04 14:08:00
330.   Mattpat11
329 They have a comparable offense and significantly better pitching.
2007-12-04 14:13:30
331.   51cq24
330 i'm not sure how much better their pitching really is. beckett was great last year but wasn't the year before, and didn't pitch well against us. schilling hasn't been that good for years. dice k was pretty disappointing. lester doesn't seem to be anything special. buchholz is impressive but he has the same question marks as hughes and joba. so what is so great about their pitching? if they get santana it will be very formidable. but as it is i don't know how much better it really is.
2007-12-04 14:20:10
332.   E-Rocker
331 It's not so much how much better the Red Sox staff is going to be vs. the Yankees, which I agree that the Yankees beat up on all of their aces. It's the fact that their staff is going to tear throught the rest of the AL. And that alone might make the division harder to win. That said, I am still pleased that for now, Hughes is still a Yankee, as don't want to see him traded.
2007-12-04 14:27:55
333.   ms october
just want to throw something out there that may have been mentioned, but i don't think it has been prominent.
the yanks best position players, other than cano, are at their peak or beginning a decline. so if this team (meaning one in which jeter, arod, posada, maybe abreu and a few others are among the best players) is going to win a ws, it probably needs to happen in the next few years.
i think santana definitely gives you that over hughes and taking it further a rotation of santana, wang, pettitte, joba, ipk/moose takes a lot of pressure of joba and ipk/moose and slots people to their more natural place in a rotation for the next year or two.

now the counter for this is what are the long-term implications. i/we don't fully know. but in a few years time we are hoping that some of these other pretty highly touted pitching prospects will be ready to take a place in the rotation. my guess is that andy will need the most immediate replacing, with hopes that wang and santana would be good for at least 3 years and hopefully more.
lastly, the construction of this team and what exists in the farm makes me want to hold onto jackson the most of any of the 3rd prospects.

2007-12-04 14:38:12
334.   Mattpat11
331 They had the best pitching staff in baseball last year. That's what's so good about it.

We can beat the Red Sox all 18 times. If our pitching continues to be mediocre at best and theirs continues to be the best in baseball, with the possible inclusion of the best pitcher in baseball, I really don't see how things are going to be any different.

2007-12-04 14:49:25
335.   51cq24
334 presumably our young pitching staff will be improving
2007-12-04 14:58:11
336.   Start Spreading the News
330 The Yanks scored 101 runs more than the Sox and gave up 120 more runs than the Sox. Yet you say the offense is 'comparable' and pitching is "significantly better.'

Seems like there is something amiss in your analysis. If 120 run pitching differential is significant (favoring the Sox), 100 run offensive differential should be significant also (favoring the Yanks).

It is not all doom and gloom in the Yanks/Sox universe for the Yankee fans. If you take out the abysmal April where the Yankees trotted out rookie pitcher after rookie, then the picture looks better. From May onwards, the Sox scored 738 runs and gave up 568. Yanks scored 827 and gave up 659. The offense scored 89 more runs. But the pitching differential improves to only 91 runs.

So clearly the Sox have better pitching. But the Yanks have clearly the better offense. And if we ever get real production from 1st base, we will more than adequately make up for the probable decline from Posada and A-Rod. Meanwhile the Sox offense doesn't really improve since Ellsbury's offense should compensate for Mike Lowell's decline.

2007-12-04 15:01:02
337.   randym77
147 Wonderful.

"The San Francisco Chronicle reported that according to two officials with knowledge of former Sen. George Mitchell's probe of performance-enhancing drugs in baseball, the report will be released in the two weeks before Christmas, rather than during the winter meetings.

That means that teams could make deals during the winter meetings, only to learn two weeks later that the free agent they just signed faced possible discipline by Major League Baseball for past use of banned substances."

2007-12-04 15:19:30
338.   ms october
am hearing miguel cabrera and willis to the tigers for a deal centering on maybin and andrew miller.

if true - twins chances of doing anything next year go down; and angels are even more likely to go for santana now since they would not be getting cabrera

2007-12-04 15:29:45
339.   randym77
Cabrera and Willis? Holy crap.
2007-12-04 15:30:56
340.   williamnyy23
338 That's confirmed...man, the American League is only getting stronger. This might not be the best period in time to go with the kids.
2007-12-04 15:34:38
341.   Yankee Fan In Boston
339 willis might get rocked in the AL. his peripherals have been spiraling. cabrera? well... the tigers are going to be tough.

they are said to be going after andruw jones as well... according to guillen.

2007-12-04 15:35:29
342.   ms october
340 yeah - the al is definitely tough, with the wild card probably being that much tougher.
willis may actually be key - i don't see the tiger's staff as that great and it seems fairly injury prone.
but cabrera in the lineup is rough - and he supposedly already lost 15lbs
2007-12-04 15:37:25
343.   williamnyy23
341 Willis is small potatoes in the deal...what makes this a good deal for Detroit is Ordonez, Sheffield and Cabrera in the middle of the lineup.

Baseball Prospectus has the Santana deal all but done, but no one else has it that close. If the Yankees really do stand pat and let everyone else snap up the big names, you have to admire Cashman's conviction. I also think it proves that Cashman is still very much in control of the team.

2007-12-04 15:40:48
344.   ms october
pete has some stuff up from joe girardi-

key points:
1) yanks would use a six man rotation
2) he is high on farnsworth too -
i think mattpat may need an alibi - i'll work on one.
if we are stuck with professor farnswacker for another year - he better have his once every few years decent year this year

2007-12-04 15:43:28
345.   51cq24
340 if not now, when? we have the kids now. calm down. i'm not worried about the tigers.
2007-12-04 15:47:00
346.   williamnyy23
345 When every team in the AL isn't busy acquiring top tier talent.
2007-12-04 15:49:22
347.   51cq24
346 and we're developing it. no need to change the strategy.
2007-12-04 15:49:42
348.   tommyl
344

1) One of the many reasons Girardi is the right man for the job.

2) Whatever, I just take it as posturing to increase his trade value or psyche Kyle into having confidence or something.

2007-12-04 15:51:49
349.   Mattpat11
343 And Guillen.

344 I'm horrified that if he has a decent year they'll keep him.

2007-12-04 15:53:32
350.   Mattpat11
348 I think at some point, after a year and a half of trying to increase Kyle's trade value, it might be time for the organization to accept that no one else has as high an opinion of him as we do.
Show/Hide Comments 351-400
2007-12-04 15:54:27
351.   tommyl
350 But he throws 100+! ;)
2007-12-04 15:55:32
352.   williamnyy23
347 If you are willing to miss the playoffs for a couple years as it develops, then yes, by all means.
2007-12-04 15:55:35
353.   Mattpat11
336 This idea that we're fine with our crappy pitching because we can pound other teams has failed us over and over and over and over again.
2007-12-04 15:56:29
354.   Mattpat11
351 I just sobbed.
2007-12-04 15:59:58
355.   williamnyy23
351 Actually, I don't think he still throws 100 mph...I don't recall seeing him hit the mark last season.
2007-12-04 16:13:22
356.   randym77
355 He did. I remember him hitting 102 mph in one game.

I'm not a Farnsy fan, but I gotta give him credit. When he's on his game, that fastball is unreal.

2007-12-04 16:13:47
357.   ms october
349 ohhhh - when will this madness end?

352 yes - and the other moves (meaning the off season re-sigings) and the fact that as i mentioned earlier most of our best players are at their peak and are heading or are in decline and that the position player cuppard is somewhat bear make that a slightly tougher strategy

353 let's hope that's what detroit is

355 i'm sure it's hard to throw a 100 when your neck is stiff :}

2007-12-04 16:19:27
358.   williamnyy23
Great move by the Padres to extend Peavy through 2012. The best part is they don't have to scrap his current deal, which runs through 2009. In terms of present value, it seems like a very fair price.
2007-12-04 16:28:13
359.   Mattpat11
356 Problem with a 100 mph pin straight fastball is if you run into it, its not landing.
2007-12-04 17:24:09
360.   JL25and3
Holy crap. That is some deal that just went down.
2007-12-04 17:37:08
361.   SF Yanks
344 Yankees would not use a six man rotation.
2007-12-04 18:36:35
362.   mehmattski
To put the Cabrera deal in perspective, imagine if it were the Yankees:

Phil Hughes (at least equivalent to Miller)
Melky Cabrera (Maybin is faster and has a bit more power)
Jesus Montero (back-up catcher, although Nabelo can contribute immediately)
Ross Ohlendorf (24 y/o 6-year minor league reliever, like de la Cruz)
Jeff Marquez (22 y/o starter at AA)
Alan Horne (24 y/o starter at AA with great peripherals)

I adjusted up a prospect level on the last three guys because Nabelo is signficantly further along than Montero, and Maybin projects better than Melky. Can you imagine if the Yankees made that trade? We'd probably all be drinking ourselves to death tonight, although I'm not sure whether it would be out of pleasure or pain.

2007-12-04 18:39:39
363.   randym77
Yeah, but does Melky have a web site like this?

http://www.cameronmaybin.tv/

(Guess he's going to have to get himself a new theme song...)

2007-12-04 18:42:29
364.   mehmattski
363 Well at the end of the intro, it said "It's only a Matter of Time." This failed to specify that it was referring to the inevitability that Dombrowski would trade Maybin for one of the best hitters in baseball...
2007-12-04 18:46:47
365.   mehmattski
Man, even Chyll Will's crickets are quiet...
2007-12-04 19:01:27
366.   randym77
Everyone's probably exhausted from last night's vigil.

FWIW, Pete Abe quotes Hank as saying the Yankees are out of the Santana mix...but Pete thinks the Yankees likely told the Twins to give them a call before they do anything permanent. And points out that the Red Sox have backed out of a trade before, when they couldn't come to a deal with the player (A-Rod).

MLB Trade Rumors says Theo expects the negotiating to go deep into the night. Sounds like they're still arguing names.

2007-12-04 19:02:31
367.   Bama Yankee
365 MLB Trade Rumors is reporting that the Red Sox are close to finalizing a deal that would send Chyll Will's crickets to the Cardinals for Albert Pujols... ;-)
2007-12-04 19:05:08
368.   williamnyy23
362 That's not quite accurate. Cameron Maybin is considered to be a stud, blue chip prospect (top 10 in all of baseball). His upside is considerably higher than Melky. Maybin, not Miller, is the centerpiece of this deal.
2007-12-04 19:10:24
369.   Mattpat11
363
Holy crap.

366 Well, I guess its time to start believing the hype and hope the kids live up to it.

2007-12-04 19:24:33
370.   mehmattski
368 PECOTA projects Maybin to be in the .270-.280 range of EqA in the next three years, which is also about what Melky projects to. Granted, Melky's PECOTA is based on a whole lot more data than Maybin's, but for the next few years, they may be equivalent numbers. Melky's 20 year old season at A+ is very similar to Maybin's (also 20 at A+ in 07):

Melky 364 PA .288/.341/.438o
Maybin 339 PA .304/.393/.486

So, like I said, Maybin is more projectible and has more power. So I stand by my trade analogy in 362 , unless you're suggesting that the Yankees would have had to give up more than what I said, like subbing in Jackson for one of the pitchers.

2007-12-04 19:41:21
371.   mehmattski
Everyone's watching the Victoria Secret Fashion Show, I guess...
2007-12-04 20:20:22
372.   tommyl
Via Pete Abe, Phil Hughes email response to the trade talk:

It's been tough trying to follow any of this the past week. One minute it's a for sure thing, the next it's not. I want to stay in NY and its good to know I have the backing of the fan base.

You sure do kid. We want you in pinstripes for a long time.

2007-12-04 20:45:09
373.   Raf
371 Guilty as charged...
2007-12-04 20:49:51
374.   Schteeve
Man look at Detroit just buying themselves another championship. What an Evil Empire.
2007-12-04 21:53:12
375.   yankz
370 How are those numbers at all similar?!
2007-12-05 03:47:02
376.   williamnyy23
370 374 Agreed....how are those numbers similar? I don't have the PECOTA numbers handy (nor would I put much stock in them for two players so young and with such limited sample size), but regardless, Maybin is considered to be a top-10 talent in the game, while many feel Melky is no more than a solid player. Based on that perception, the inclusion of Maybin in a deal has much, much greater weight than Melky. As a result, the Yankees would have to give up a lot more to compensate for that difference.
2007-12-05 05:08:00
377.   OldYanksFan
Simply vote: One word answers only.
Do the Yankees end up WITH Santana?
(prizes given out on Friday)
2007-12-05 05:50:26
378.   Yankee Fan In Boston
377 ervin?

Comment status: comments have been closed. Baseball Toaster is now out of business.