Baseball Toaster Bronx Banter
Say It Together . . . Naturally
2007-11-02 09:46
by Cliff Corcoran
Note: The Bronx Banter blog has moved to

As expected, the Yankees have picked up Bobby Abreu's $16 million option for the 2008 season. It was really a rather obvious move to make. Having lost their cleanup hitter, the Yankees could ill-afford to lose their number-three hitter as well and though Abreu had his worst full season last year, which continued a downward trend in his production as he eases into his mid-30s (Abreu will turn 34 during spring training), that was largely the result of a slow start, as Abreu hit just .228/.313/.289 in April and May, but then flipped the switch and hit .309/.396/.520 over the final four months, which was right in line with his career numbers of .300/.408/.500.

Given this year's weak free-agent class, no team could afford to part with so productive a hitter. The best available alternative would have been Andruw Jones, but Jones is a career .263/.342/.497 hitter coming off his own worst full season (a dismal .222/.311/.413), has a bad reputation as far as conditioning and team chemistry go, and is only three years younger than Abreu to begin with. Sure, Jones is a Gold Glove center fielder rather than a wall-shy right fielder, but Jones' defense has slipped in the last few seasons. Most importantly, there was no guarantee that the Yankees would have been able to sign him, and, as he is the best hitter on the market (save for hot potato Barry Bonds and the banished Alex Rodriguez), they would likely have overpayed if they did. Instead they have Abreu, whose better than Jones at the plate and an established and popular member of the team both in the clubhouse and in the stands, for one year at $16 million. Not bad at all.

I'll be back in a bit with a look at how Abreu's return could impact the rest of the 2008 Yankee lineup.

Comments (261)
Show/Hide Comments 1-50
2007-11-02 11:23:59
1.   thelarmis
i, for one, am very glad boBBy will be back. i was a fan of his throughout his philly tenure and think he fits this club rather well. since he'll be playing for a contract, i think he'll have a monster year. well, he needs to stay healthy and have some protection in the lineup. i guess right now, that would be in the form of posada, if he's back. this will probably be abreu's last year with us and i hope he returns to his solid 20-20 form w/ a .300 avg...
2007-11-02 11:24:19
2.   RIYank
Andruw, not Andrew.

I was daydreaming about Fukudome. But I'm happy they've held on to Bobby.

2007-11-02 11:26:49
3.   mehmattski
"as he is the best hitter on the market (save for hot potato Barry Bonds and the banished Alex Rodriguez)"

Heh. Jose Molina is the best hitter on the market, except for all those other guys...

Anyway.... how about some right handed hitters? Why are signing Jones and picking up Abreu's option mutually exclusive? Why can't the Yankees trade Melky for a 1st or 3rd baseman, sign Jones, and have this lineup:

LF Damon
SS Jeter
RF Abreu
CF Jones
C Posada
DH Matsui
1B Duncan/Giambi
2B Cano
3B Atkins/Crede/Betemit

2007-11-02 11:29:48
4.   RIYank
Not for nuthin', but isn't it time to move Robbie up in the line-up?
2007-11-02 11:30:28
5.   williamnyy23
3 I don't know who it will be, if Cabrera is not getable, I have a feeling there will be a right handed bat in that lineup that we haven't even contemplated
2007-11-02 11:32:04
6.   jeterian swing
3 Crede is not an option -- he's got a career OBP of .305 (!) AND he's coming off back surgery.
2007-11-02 11:32:33
7.   Cliff Corcoran
3 Yeah, but no one wants Bonds and the Yankees aren't going to sign Rodriguez. So they don't count.

4 Yes.

2007-11-02 11:33:10
8.   OldYanksFan
3 I miss ARod!
2007-11-02 11:36:18
9.   Cliff Corcoran
3 My point was not that they are mutually exclusive, but that if they didn't pick up Abreu, they would have had to sign Jones, which would have been a downgrade.
2007-11-02 11:37:27
10.   OldYanksFan
"Amid reports that Rodriguez is seeking a 12-year, $360 million deal, Boras said he has yet to discuss specific economics with any major league club."

12 YEARS!!!!! The guy is amazing. Well, I guess 8/$250m looks pretty cheap in comparison

2007-11-02 11:37:43
11.   RIYank
Damn, I thought I just figured out an ingenious solution:
The Cubs grab A-Rod, and then we trade for Aramis Ramirez. Then I looked at A-Ram's splits.

Home OPS: 1.046
Away OPS: .746

Oh well. But, holy smokes, if A-Rod's numbers got boosted in Wrigley like that... gulp.

2007-11-02 11:39:31
12.   YankeeInMichigan
Where did you get your early lead on the signing, Cliff? Pete Abe still hasn't posted it, and the ESPN article has a 2:13 timestamp
2007-11-02 11:42:49
13.   YankeeInMichigan
10 ESPN reports that A-Rod's condition for talking to the Yanks was a deal totalling $350 million. The Yankees were prepared to offer an extension of 5/$150M, which added to the current contract would come to 8/$231M -- still $119M short.
2007-11-02 11:42:56
14.   RIYank
I think Ed Price of the Star-Ledger had the story first. Anyway, very early.

2007-11-02 11:43:42
15.   yankz
11 We've found a problem with the splits of every single possible 3Bman. I think we're just going to have to settle.
2007-11-02 11:49:29
16.   RIYank
15 Yeah.
Hm, neither Coors nor Wrigley could explain the huge split discrepancies for their 3Bs. I wonder whether some players are just a lot more comfortable at home?
2007-11-02 11:55:12
17.   Sliced Bread
0 It took me a few, Cliff, but Lionel Richie? Damn, you went deep for that one.

Appropriate as Abreu is smooth jazz, quiet storm and all that... even if that's not yer music.

2007-11-02 11:55:21
18.   Shaun P
5 I think you're right.

10 Again, more negotiation tactics. If the Yanks aren't in the bidding, and Boras can't use the specter of the Yanks to drive up the price, what does he do? Leak fake stories about what A-Rod is looking for, so he gets to frame the discussion about money and years.

Only someone as foolish as Tom Hicks would fall for this stuff.

2007-11-02 11:58:05
19.   OldYanksFan
"There are things about Joe Torre, if I wanted to come out and say, would show how cold and calculated he really is," Kay fumed. "... Joe Torre is for Joe Torre. ... The graveyard of Yankees coaches is loaded with bones of coaches Joe Torre did nothing about."

As the former Yankees manager departs for Lipstick City to manage the Dodgers, it's certain Kay won't be shedding any tears. Nor will he be receiving an invitation to a Torre Bon Voyage party. Through Torre's 12-year Yankees career, Torre and Kay - it is fair to say - were not on the same page.

Eeks... The King is dead.

2007-11-02 11:58:09
20.   Start Spreading the News
Have you guys seen this?
2007-11-02 12:00:58
21.   RIYank
20 Yeah, someone linked it last thread. Kind of moronic, isn't it?
2007-11-02 12:06:18
22.   NJYankee41
19 Michael Kay has bones to pick with a lot of people. I can't take him and his whining about society too seriously. He's the one of the biggest sensationalists.

20 A couple of those ideas are interesting, but if that all happened my head would blow up.

2007-11-02 12:12:02
23.   Sliced Bread
19 Nah, no matter what Kay says, Elvis is alive and managing the Dodgers.

I enjoy Kay's show, but he talks outta both sides of his mouth on most topics, including Torre. One minute he was ranting against Joe, the next minute he was blasting some caller for having the audacity to question whether Joe's the right guy for the job. Typical talk radio shtick.
Most of the time Kay was killing Joe, he was fairly consistent about that -- but his opinions, informed as they may or may not be, are of no consequence at all.
Purely infotainment.

2007-11-02 12:12:38
24.   cult of basebaal
20 dammit, always a step slow ... i just saw that on ESPN ... i know boras always throws the craziest things out there to see what sticks, but that, if true, has got to be the craziest contact proposal i've ever seen ...
2007-11-02 12:14:44
25.   Shaun P
20 Buy a World Series? You mean like the Red Sox did?

I'm sorry, but when he mentioned Pavano as a rotation option, given the guy is likely to miss the entire '08 season after TJ (with Carl's typical extra-long recovery), he lost me.

2007-11-02 12:15:49
26.   NJYankee41
25 Yeah the milk came out of my nose on that one.
2007-11-02 12:17:40
27.   JL25and3
After two or three more teams drop out of the bidding, Boras will announce that Rodriguez is now looking for 15 years/$500M
2007-11-02 12:19:42
28.   Cliff Corcoran
27 How about a lifetime contract that pays him $60 million annually in perpetuity?
2007-11-02 12:21:16
29.   Sliced Bread
28 Omar will make it $75 mill...
2007-11-02 12:23:26
30.   NJYankee41
27 Arod should just apply for a franchise of his own. How about The Newport Beach Arods?
2007-11-02 12:23:59
31.   YankeeInMichigan
20 Liked some of it, especially trading for Wilson and moving Jeter to 3B. He was way off-mark on Pavano. Santana ideas were intriguing. No way 5 years on Jones. If we had to get an FA center fielder, I'd go with Rowand.
2007-11-02 12:25:51
32.   ny2ca2dc
Following those who agree it's time for Cano to move up in the lineup, if Damon can be traded, how about moving Jeter to leadoff, and either Cano second or Bobby second & Cano third. Cleanup thru 6-hole would be come combination of Giambi, Matsui, Po. Followed by the first baseman, the third baseman (aprox), then Melky ninth.

Man we got a lot of lefties...

2007-11-02 12:28:20
33.   Sliced Bread
30 Selig approves on the condition that it's The Newport Beach ARods... Of Los Angeles.
2007-11-02 12:35:14
34.   tommyl
27 28 I see this A-Rod stuff as the same thing Boras did with Damon 2 years ago. Remember when he said Damon was the greatest leadoff hitter in baseball and was seeking something like a 7-10 year deal? Didn't end up that way.

Boras and A-Rod really need the Yankees to get in on the bidding. Otherwise its going to be a choice between some contenders that don't want to pay for him (Dodgers, Cubs, etc.) or non-factors who overspend (hello Giants, I'm looking at you). I really don't see how he's going to get a deal of that magnitude with a contending team, but then again I'm not as good as Boras or as stupid as some GMs.

2007-11-02 12:40:32
35.   Sliced Bread
34 Don't underestimate the Mets williningness to spend.
They'll shuffle players, and re-name their new stadium after ARod to get him there.
2007-11-02 12:43:12
36.   standuptriple
So A-Rod wants $350, huh? So in reality he'll get $250 and cripple whichever team signs him. Remember losing on the Rangers A-Rod? Because you're going to have to learn to live with it. I doubt his next team gives him multiple opt-out clauses too.
2007-11-02 12:46:23
37.   Alex Belth
I loved Torre's schtick but I never harbored any illusions that he was a pussycat. I think he was interested in Joe Torre first and foremost, and putting forth the Poppa Joe image.

That said, remember Torre singled out Kay as an instigator back in 1996 in front of the entire clubhouse. I'm sure Kay has been waiting for years to get back at Joe...

2007-11-02 12:55:29
38.   mehmattski
32 Which is why I'm still in favor of signing Andruw Jones... even in a down year, he hit 26 homers while playing in a pitcher's park. Number of players currently on Yankees' roster who hit 26 homers last year: zero.

Now, would he hit as many homers in Yankee stadium as he did in other parks? Of his 16 Turner Field home runs in 2007, 13 went to left field, which is 335 down the line and 380 in the gap- Yankee Stadium is 318 down the line and 399 in the gap. I don't think his power production would be sapped that much from being a righty in Yankee stadium. I also don't think that 2007 is an accurate prediction of his future worth- a three or four year contract could be quite beneficial to the Yankees, whose prospect OFs are a few years away.

2007-11-02 13:00:11
39.   JL25and3
31 Moving Jeter to 3B just isn't going to happen.
2007-11-02 13:02:56
40.   dianagramr

2007 Home/Road splits for 3Bs, minimum 150 PAs at home and on road:

PLAYER Home Road Diff
Chone Figgins .993 .705 .288
Maicer Izturis .887 .616 .271
Aramis Ramirez 1.046 .780 .266
N Garciaparra .835 .570 .265
Mike Lowell .993 .767 .226
Garrett Atkins .936 .773 .163
Eric Chavez .825 .691 .134
Mike Lamb .888 .764 .124
Miguel Cabrera 1.026 .905 .121
Alex Gordon .787 .670 .117
Brandon Inge .748 .631 .117
David Wright 1.021 .912 .109
Ryan Braun 1.045 .966 .079
Ty Wigginton .830 .753 .077
Troy Glaus .883 .808 .075
Ryan Zimmerman .815 .760 .055
Mark Reynolds .868 .823 .045
Akinori Iwamura .779 .762 .017
Jose Bautista .759 .747 .012
Greg Dobbs .780 .780 .000
Josh Fields .784 .792 -.008
E Encarnacion .790 .799 -.009
Nick Punto .544 .581 -.037
Melvin Mora .735 .784 -.049
Pedro Feliz .677 .737 -.060
Alex Rodriguez 1.034 1.101 -.067
Marco Scutaro .653 .731 -.078
K Kouzmanoff .743 .823 -.080
Scott Rolen .685 .776 -.091
Chipper Jones .981 1.075 -.094
Adrian Beltre .745 .858 -.113
Ramon Vazquez .608 .735 -.127
Casey Blake .706 .846 -.140
Morgan Ensberg .589 .860 -.271

2007-11-02 13:05:13
41.   rbj
Heck most folk I know are for themselves first, especially in business. I'm sure the Babe was that way too, his last couple of years in Beantown didn't cover him in glory. Still, Joe got the team to the playoffs every year, there was no Bronx Zoo atmosphere, so it was a success.

I'm starting to think that Boras may have overshot on this one, probably the only one he could hoodwink is the Angels. The Mets & RS aren't going to fall for his shtick.

2007-11-02 13:05:48
42.   tommyl
36 That's a good point. With a salary that high, he's gauranteed to be a huge share of the teams payroll, limiting their options for the rest of the roster.
2007-11-02 13:06:10
43.   standuptriple
40 I wonder which/how many of those guys can be had?
It's too bad the Nats are so committed to Zimmerman. I think he's still got a lot to offer.
2007-11-02 13:06:57
44.   mehmattski
43 Hey, they traded Chris Carter for Willy Mo Pena... ya never know...
2007-11-02 13:09:14
45.   yankz
44 Wasn't that the Dbacks?
2007-11-02 13:14:07
46.   yankz
Yanks second to last in Bill James's "Young Talent Rankings," but it doesn't include the 3-headed beast:

2007-11-02 13:21:19
47.   OldYanksFan
Is the Santana trade as proped in 20 realistic? I'd jump on it in a second. I mean, all 4 of those guys have some value, but all are relatively easy to replace. Feedback: Would Minn go for that deal?

Also, his take on JD is true. Giambi should get as many DH ABs as possible, until he shows he can't post an .850 OPS.

And he's right about Jetes (as we all know), although 1st might be a better position. Jetes has a very slow 1st step. That's death for a 3rd baseman. Think bunts and hard hit shots down the line.

Andruw is certainly an upgrade over Melky. He's not the best OFer, but he still decent.
Sexton we don't really need.

Whats up guys? Aside from Pavano, I thought his thoughts were between interesting and good ideas.

2007-11-02 13:25:10
48.   cult of basebaal
46 not only that, but there's no mention of hughes, chamberlain or IPK in the comments ... while he makes sure to throw in the following sop regarding the red sox:

The young players Boston is most excited about, Ellsbury and Buchholz, don't show up yet because they spent most of the 2007 season in the minors.

2007-11-02 13:26:05
49.   tommyl
47 I dunno, Jeter has always been very good at positioning, maybe that would compensate for his slow 1st step on bunts? A bigger worry to me is that Jetes seems to have the slowest reaction times of any infielder I've ever seen, at times he reacts visibly late compared to the other infielders (this is the primary reason he has no range to his left, to his right he compensates by going deep in the hole and using his very strong arm). I agree though, I don't think he'd make the best 3B.

Still, I could believe that Jetes subpar at 3rd but with a plus SS would be a net gain in defense. Anyone have any thoughts on this?

2007-11-02 13:26:46
50.   cult of basebaal
47 go for that deal? i think they'd fall over laughing ... because that deal's laughably bad and easily beaten by any number of teams
Show/Hide Comments 51-100
2007-11-02 13:29:24
51.   jeterian swing
47 In a vaccuum, Minn might make that deal, assuming they couldn't sign Johan themselves, and we could even sweeten the pot with, say, Kennedy instead of Rasner. But surely LAD (or someone else) will offer much, much more. So I'd say while the pieces fit very nicely, it's still extremely unlikely.
2007-11-02 13:30:21
52.   tommyl
50 I'm not so sure. Santana is basically a 1-year rental, unless you can sign him to a large extension. How many teams out there can afford to trade cheap major leaguers for a 1-year rental and would do it. I don't see the Sox getting in on it, maybe the Mets, the Dodgers, who else?
2007-11-02 13:33:44
53.   tommyl
46 How are we below the Rangers who have one B guy listed and we have 3 As? Kinsler is better than Cabrera, Cano and CMW combined?
2007-11-02 13:36:22
54.   tommyl
46 Also what's his criteria. Does a team with a bunch of so-so younger players (say the Royals) rank higher than a team with only a few young guys who are really good (say the Red Sox and Yankees)? I'd rather have 3-4 really amazing guys than 9 or 10 mediocre ones.
2007-11-02 13:37:33
55.   cult of basebaal
52 i dunno, randy johnson brought a nice score as a half-season rental ... these things do happen when the guy in question is seen as a difference maker ... depending on when the deal would go down the acquiring team could have close to a year to negotiate that extension, which of course every team would ... and that assumes that the deal wouldn't go down with a provisional window in which the team could attempt to negotiate an extension as a condition of the trade, which of course would bring back a much better return for the twins ...
2007-11-02 13:38:21
56.   mehmattski
45 Well, he came to the Red Sox via the Nationals, who sent pitching prospect Emiliano Fruto to the Diamondbacks in exchange for Carter, then essentially flipped him immediately to the Red Sox for Pena. That is, the earlier deal for Carter to the Nats was already in place when the Red Sox came calling and the Nats decided they liked Pena better...
2007-11-02 13:39:12
57.   JL25and3
49 Honestly, I think you overestimate both his arm and his range to his right. His arm is okay, improved a bit by the jump throw; his range in the hole is average, maybe.

It doesn't make up for his deficiencies going to his left, which were considerably worse last year than ever before. Hopefully, that was due to injury or something, and he'll go back to being merely subpar.

2007-11-02 13:40:59
58.   cult of basebaal
[46 et al] i love the fact he just randomly throws in guys who don't really qualify [like santana] but then marks them down because they're too old ... nice rigor, bill ... pass
2007-11-02 13:41:50
59.   Jersey
54 I was about to ask that. Don't know what this "points" system is about, and it feels like there's a whole introduction missing...maybe it got lost in the translation to SI. Which kinda gets back to the whole sport journalism convo from yesterday.

But yeah, this is kinda goofy.

2007-11-02 13:42:41
60.   tommyl
57 I wasn't saying they came even close to making up for his shortcomings. What I was saying was that he might be a bit less crappy as a 3B, and if you couple that with the addition of a good fielding SS the overall defense might improve.
2007-11-02 13:43:30
61.   JL25and3
42 That's one of the reasons I think leaving NY was such a big mistake for Rodriguez. It's the one place where Texas wasn't going to be repeated. They weren't going to let his salary prevent them from spending elsewhere. They also weren't going to complain about what an albatross his contract was.
2007-11-02 13:44:40
62.   tommyl
61 Yup, like I said, have fun in SF A-Rod. Hit those balls into McCovey cove and enjoy golf and wine tasting trips every October.
2007-11-02 13:45:29
63.   JL25and3
60 Fair enough.

Whether he'll be good at 3B or not is something we'll probably never know. It won't be happening in the near future.

2007-11-02 13:47:50
64.   jeterian swing
61 Why is Philly completely out of the mix on the A-Rod talks? They need a 3b and they have money, no?
2007-11-02 13:50:44
65.   tommyl
64 They do, but how much money do they have?

If they did nab A-Rod they would have arguably the greatest infield of all time: A-Rod, Rollins, Utley, Howard. That team might score 1000 runs.

2007-11-02 13:59:36
66.   standuptriple
62 And the fan base is already pre-programed for a primadonna and failure. Not to mention the Boras angle. I can really see that being a great place for him. And also
2007-11-02 14:11:19
67.   cult of basebaal
guess this speaks volumes about the reason that wilson has been traded twice already ... i certainly hope that betemit gets the message and comes to camp in shape ...

"I want Robinson Cano at second base, that's what I want. ... I'd rather not have to make (a third baseman) out of a second baseman," Cashman said after yesterday's Joe Girardi press conference. "I said, 'Robbie, I love you at second,' was playful with him. I told him, 'I know you can play third base. I know it.'

"I said to him, 'I'd like to keep you at second, so I need you to make sure that Wilson Betemit shows up here in tip-top shape next year. If you want to stay at second base, make sure your countryman is up for the challenge.'"

Cashman added that "right now" the only internal possibility to replace Rodriguez is Betemit, whose lack of conditioning displeased the Yanks after they acquired him from Los Angeles at the trade deadline.

2007-11-02 14:48:27
68.   Zack
I know this is OT dating back to the last thread, but OldYanksFan, I think you are way way way overvaluing Buccholz, Lester and Ellsbury. And if you are going to overvalue B and E based on such a small sample, then you have to say that Joba will be easily on the level of Beckett. Thats the problem of such short sample sizes.

As JL said in the last thread, Ellsbury cab head in two directions, either he's Ichiro! lite or he's Juan Pierre. He doesn't have Ichiros! arm, and lets be honest, he's not going to be as good as him, period. Go look at Juan Pierre's career #s, they are pretty damn close to Jacoby's ml #s. Unless Ellsbury turns out to be a really really good hitter, which he hasn't really shown to be yet (other than those 17 games in aa this year), pitchers are going to learn how to pitch to him, and outside of Fenway with its short FRs down the line and weird angles, he is going to have a problem maintaining that average...

Lester has shown no ability to control the ball or consistently strike batters out, before or after the cancer, and I just don't have faith in him...

2007-11-02 15:01:00
69.   standuptriple
I always thought Bill James was a stats guy. When did he get an eye for talent?
2007-11-02 15:05:11
70.   yankz
If Arod declines arbitration, aren't the Yankees unable to sign him until next season starts?
2007-11-02 15:09:21
71.   RIYank
70 I think we have a certain period of time to sign him again. Like until early January.
2007-11-02 15:11:38
72.   yankz
Like I said yesterday, most Yankee fans are morons. From MLBTR:

"I for one hope that Arod goes to the redsox. Im a huge yankee fan and i would love nothing more than to see Boston start losing. The best way for a team to loose is to add Arod. I mean the Yanks were amazing before Arod and every one thought with Arod the yanks would be unbeatable. We all saw how that ended up and i could only hope the same would happen to the sox."

2007-11-02 15:17:49
73.   tommyl
72 I hear that Scott Brosius and Charlie Hayes are available? Anyone have a line to Ruben Sierra's agent?
2007-11-02 15:27:08
74.   sultan27
How about Blalock in a trade? He'll be 27 next year and I believe he is going into the last year of his contract.
2007-11-02 15:31:10
75.   OldYanksFan
RE: Buccholz, Lester and Ellsbury
I'll tell you I go more on what I see. I get NESN, and tend to watch most Sox games. Buccholz and Lester are a solid #4 and #3, and could be a #3 and #2. Ellsbury looks a lot better then Melky. Great speed will make his D above averge ala JD in his prime. he's a linedrive hitter, has a good eye, does not (unlike Melky) swing a lot at balls out of the zone. He is NOT Ichiro (and very few are). He looks like a .800 OPS guy, maybe better depending, with great speed and above average D. He is an upgrade over Coco.

Joba and Phil are better, no question. But the Sox have Beckett and Dice-K above Lester and Buccholz (thanks for the spelling). I guess a lot rides on who their 5th guys is.

I loved what IPK looked like, but I don't think he is projected to be any better then a #3 at best. Am I wrong?

2007-11-02 15:43:24
76.   yankz
74 .699 OPS away from Arlington. I know we've gone splits crazy, but that's just abysmal.
2007-11-02 15:55:02
77.   OldYanksFan
ARod - A Different Take
2007-11-02 16:09:00
78.   OldYanksFan
Fox News: At the moment, Cabrera is the sweet-swinging embodiment of high-risk, high-reward player. On one hand, he has the ability to be the Manny Ramirez of the next generation; the only two players in the baseball who have more combined Win Shares the past three seasons are Alex Rodriguez and Albert Pujols. On the other hand, he now looks like he swallowed Billy the Marlin whole, and by some estimates he's put on as many as 70 pounds since arriving in the big leagues late in '03

He's probably too talented to eat himself out of baseball, but at the rate he's going, he's going to be a Cecil Fielder-sized DH before he's 30

2007-11-02 16:11:26
79.   RIYank
77 That hypothesis doesn't seem to explain the data. Why did A-Rod opt out early? Why not call the Yankees on the leak bluff (if it was a bluff)? And why now tell the press that they had insisted on $350M?

I never thought the Nomaas guys were particularly bright.

2007-11-02 16:18:54
80.   yankz
79 They would NEVER lose a game.
2007-11-02 17:18:02
81.   cult of basebaal
68 maybe he does, maybe he doesn't, coincidently, kevin goldstein happened to rollout his top 11 prospects for the red sox over at BP today

on bucholz he says:

Buchholz is the total package with outstanding stuff, outstanding command and control, and outstanding mound presence. His four-seam fastball sits at 92-94 mph, can touch 97, and features excellent movement. It also isn't even his best pitch. His plus-plus curveball is a true 12-6 breaker, and multiple scouts relay stories of batters falling down while trying to hit it. His changeup is also an above-average offering that features a late and heavy drop. He also mixes in a solid slider, and a two-seam fastball with some sink. His mechanics are smooth and sound, and he pitches with a fearless intensity.


Buchholz is one of the few pitching prospects around with true ace potential ... and could be an impact pitcher immediately.

on ellsbury:

Ellsbury's top tools are his speed and glovework, but he's a very good hitter as well. He makes good contact, uses all fields, and projects as a consistent .290-.310 hitter annually in the big leagues. He's a plus-plus runner with outstanding instincts on the basepaths; one scout called him the best base runner he saw all year. He gets excellent jumps on balls in the outfield, and covers a ton of ground to both sides.


Ellsbury needs to develop better secondary skills to move into the elite category as a hitter. He doesn't have much power, though most feel he'll grow enough to be good for 10-15 home runs annually. His excellent plate coverage works against him at times, and he needs to be more patient to profile as a pure leadoff man.

while on lester he says:

Lester's battle with cancer overshadowed the fact that before his health problems, he was easily one of the top left-handed prospects in baseball. By the end of 2007, and including his start in Game Four of the World Series, Lester's stuff seems to be all the way back.

and though lester's MLB performance hasn't been overwhelming, in 2006 he had cancer and in 2007 he was recovering ... and it wasn't like he wasn't highly regarded before the illness, he was #22 in Baseball America's overall Top 100 in 2006

which isn't to say the one voice is definitive about what the Sox will end up getting from the three above, but it seems silly to assume the best from Phil, Joba and IPK while cutting every corner to find fault with the potentials of the young guys from the Sox, on the player development side, that organization is no slouch ...

2007-11-02 17:18:36
82.   cult of basebaal
oops, should have formatted that better ...
2007-11-02 17:26:53
83.   OldYanksFan
68 Rebuttal to 81 ?
At least my eyes still work
2007-11-02 17:29:49
84.   cult of basebaal
75 i think right now i'd go:

joba could be the best yankee starter since ron guidry in his prime ... i like phil, but last year his peak seemed more like andy pettite in his prime ... if regains what he lost after the hammy injury and recaptures his command of the fb and curve and keeps his stuff deeper into games, that could easily change for the better, but his stuff didn't WOW me like joba's did (even accounting for the balls-out nature of joba's shorter stints)

ipk? hell, i'm trying to think of a good "in-the-prime" comp ... maybe a slightly better version of jon leiber when he was in his prime with the cubs, tiny BB/9, above average K/9 but a nearly 1:1 H/9??? their stuff seems similar

2007-11-02 17:37:52
85.   cult of basebaal
for another perspective ... the most recent Top 25 from the guys over at Project Prospect went this way:

#3 Buchholz
#6 Chamberlain
#13 IPK

ellsbury was an honorable mention

2007-11-02 17:42:05
86.   OldYanksFan
85 Where's Hughes and Lester?
Maybe Chamblerlain matured a lot?
Sounds like the Sox have 3 pretty good players, no?
2007-11-02 17:42:44
87.   JL25and3
70 That was true under the old CBA, but they took that language out of the current one.
2007-11-02 17:43:43
88.   51cq24
clay buchholz scares me. his stuff is nasty. he's also one of the weirdest looking people i've ever seen. he'll fit right into that clubhouse of uglies.

that said, i was under the impression that his fastball was more low 90s. i certainly didn't see him approach anything close to 97. the curve and change are for real, though.

lester never impressed me. he throws way too many curve balls. but i never saw him in the minors, and it's obviously unfair to judge by what we've seen in the majors. still, i don't know about a guy who throws so many off speed pitches without a good fastball. he reminded me of zito. not a bad guy to have, but not someone who will ever scare me.

hughes is a bit of a puzzle. even before the injury he was only throwing low 90s. but he did have a really nasty curve in that texas game. wainwrightesque. his hamstring popped while throwing one of them, and he said he was trying too hard to get a good break on it. so it doesn't surprise me that we never saw that crisp a pitch from him when he got back. if he does start throwing that curve again, he should be great. his velocity got up to around 92-93 towards the end of the season, but i'm not sure if we are ever going to see more.

joba is nasty. he's gonna be the best.

2007-11-02 17:47:22
89.   RIYank
86 I think Hughes and Lester are no longer 'prospects'.
It's only slightly interesting to me where various people put these guys in their lists. If some person or agency has a really impressive track record, then I'd be more interested. Otherwise I doubt people's impressions -- even the impressions of really experienced baseball people -- are worth much as predictors.
2007-11-02 17:51:19
90.   51cq24
89 right, it's much more informative to know the reasoning behind it. the bill james thing is just some bullshit that looks like nonsense and has no explanation.
2007-11-02 17:53:07
91.   yankz
89 Exactly. I think "Everyone's an expect" applies best to internet prospect lists. Only worth reading to know who's going to be good. Besides, prospects are way too impossible to predict.
2007-11-02 17:53:28
92.   yankz
91 "expert" not "expect"
2007-11-02 17:56:26
93.   RIYank
90 That really was uncharacteristically bullshitty of BJ.
2007-11-02 17:57:48
94.   51cq24
47 going back a little, sorry. there's no way that would get it done for santana. my met fan friend proposed maine, milledge and pelfrey and i laughed at him. but i take that over melky/betemit/duncan/rasner. a team will definitely offer a lot more. if i were minnesota, i'd keep santana and have maybe one of the best staffs in baseball next year and then take the draft pick in 09 before taking either of those packages.
2007-11-02 17:58:12
95.   OldYanksFan
The point is:
2008 Red Sox with Lester/Buccholz/Ellsbury >>> 2007 Red Sox.
2008 Yankees - ARod <<< 2007 2nd half Yankees.
Barry? Barry? You there?
2007-11-02 18:05:50
96.   51cq24
95 yes, as the red sox improve with their youngsters, we should improve with a 43 year old.

yankees - arod + joba/hughes/kennedy for a season. not so simple.

2007-11-02 18:20:13
97.   51cq24
oh, and + a manager who can actually out-think others.
2007-11-02 18:31:09
98.   JL25and3
93 He's always done that. All over the Historical Abstract, he says that "the system ranks so-and-so lower, but I raised him subjectively."

To tell you the truth, that doesn't bother me much. It's not like players can really be ranked that precisely. Besides, the stats used to formulate the rankings are always going to involve some subjective judgments anyway.

2007-11-02 18:34:09
99.   dianagramr
FYI, the Mariners declined their option on Jose Guillen ...

2007-11-02 18:42:44
100.   JL25and3
97 I'll make a deal. I'll let dead horses stay dead if you will.
Show/Hide Comments 101-150
2007-11-02 18:43:32
101.   Zack
81 I watched Buchholz a lot and NEVER saw him approach 97. In fact, he generally threw in the Hughes range. Hes riding basically what Hughes was coming into this year, which is to say, a great great season. Plus he had the no hitter. I'm not saying Buccholz isn't a good pitcher, he obviously is, but prospect lists are all about what have you done for me lately, thus the noticeable drop of Hughes. There was a good comparison between IPK and Buccholz done at BP that basically said that Buccholz often relies on his arsenal of pitches in that hitters don't know what to expect and therefore miss, whereas with IPK, the hitters know what is coming but still miss, for whatever reason.

But, if you really want a reason, Joba is ranked below Buccholz b/c of the no hitter, period. If you look at their pure stuff and projection, Joba's FB and slider blow Clay out of the water. Clay has a great curve and change, but isn't overpowering the way Joba is. Honestly, who else is besides maybe King Felix when he is on and Lincecum? Buccholhz is much closer to Hughes with his repertoire, and it boggles my mind how the pundits are forgetting Hughes and replacing him with their Clay love. Thats fine, they'll both be good.

But OldYanksFan, my main point was that Buccholz, like Joba/IPK/Hughes, will basically be a rook next year, and will be subject to an innings cap and rook mistakes. He had the benefit of coming up for a few starts against batters who have never seen him before, and like IPK, hes the type of pitcher who that benefits A LOT. But next year, he'll be more exposed and will ahve to push through the inevitable rough patches, as will the Yanks' young guns.

Lester, on the other hand, hasn't shown anything to demonstrate that he'll be any better than league average. Even his PS start was just like most of them, except against a dead in the water offense. 5.2 innings, 3bb, 3k, more FB than GB, 92 pitches. LEster throws a ton of pitches and there is no way to argue that he got better in the season, b/c he didn't. And he was like that pre cancer too...

2007-11-02 18:44:42
102.   OldYanksFan
96 One 43 yr old Barry Bonds >>>>>>> Any Younger
Why talk about Age. When he was 40, he posted an OPS of 1.421.
Do you think 43 >>>> last 3 year OPS average 1.040?
2007-11-02 18:44:45
103.   Zack
A rotation of Beckett, Dice-K, Wake, Buccholz, and Lester has as many ? marks as one of Pettitte, Wang, Hughes, Joba, and IPK/Moose...
2007-11-02 19:13:36
104.   OldYanksFan
103 True. But there's still the matter of our missing 3rd baseman. Cashman is gonna need to spend some money. 3rd and 1st are the only positions we can really upgrade. Maybe we WILL need to buy Seattle's corner men.
2007-11-02 19:24:47
105.   Zack
104 True, but as has already been mentioned, remember, the Yanks offense was MUCh better than the Sox was. The yanks need a 3b and 1b, the Sox need a RF, SS, C. THis is all speculation of course, but Varitek, Ortiz, Lowell, Pedroia, and Youk aren't likely to be any better. Manny will be, but maybe not by as much as expected. Drew and Lugo are big question marks, but neither really have a history of being very good offensive players consistently. And that leaves Ellsbury, but, as I already said, hes not a high OBP kind of guy. He'll score runs, but I don't see his impact being all THAT huge, though he will be an upgrade simply by the fact that hes not Coco...

I think the point of all this going way back when was just to say that I don't see the Sox as IMPROVING next year, unless they make a major move...

2007-11-02 20:06:40
106.   monkeypants
105 Good call. Maybe Manny is better, or maybe he's 36 y.o. We'll see if 32 y.o. Big Papi puts up the same numbers, too.
2007-11-02 20:56:15
107.   51cq24
100 sure.

102 "Do you think 43 >>>> last 3 year OPS average 1.040?"

i'm not sure what that means. do i think his age outweighs the numbers he's put up in previous years (including the 14 games he played in 2005)? yes. he's 43. and you took the average of his ops over the last 3 years even though his 2005 ops was the best in that span. not that the 1.022 average of the last 2 years is bad, but you can't give equal weight to a 14 game season if you want to make an honest argument. anyway, he is 43. this is very old for a baseball player. you assume he can play more games as a dh than as a right fielder. i don't know that that's necessarily true. you assume he will be healthy. i don't know that that's necessarily true. you also want to play giambi. i hope you don't expect him to play 1b.
do you really think the chaos that surrounds bonds is worth bringing here? he's 43. remember how well randy johnson had pitched in his 3 seasons before coming here (one of which was an injury-shortened season as well)? randy had a pretty good year in 2005 (he was 41), but not in 2006. yes, he's a pitcher and the difference between leagues is much more of a factor for pitchers. but the point is we don't know what a 40+ player is going to do, even if he had good recent years. add on top of that the off-field issues, the fact that bonds is NOT a 3b or 1b, and the money he would cost, and there's just no way i want to sign bonds.

2007-11-03 03:21:47
108.   SF Yanks
107 Forget the baggage, sign Bonds. You may hate him, but you won't hate the runs he'll produce. Yes, signing overpaid aged all-stars has hurt/is hurting us, but for one year it's not a bad deal. Do really think he's going to go all 700 ops on us? This is, of course, if we can figure out the DH dilemma. He'll be fine and good for one year. Besides, is he expected to receive top dollar? If some team wants to give him the world then so be it, but many teams don't want him, let alone at a high cost, however; if the price is right and the situation suites... sign him. IMHO.
2007-11-03 05:26:01
109.   OldYanksFan
107 Barry's big year was 2004, when he posted a 1.421 OPS (not, that is not a typo). In 2006, he had a 'down year', with an OPS of 'only' 0.999. He was 42 last year when he had in the area of 450 PAs and a 1.045 OPS, 2nd best in MLB. Even his biggest haters admit he can still play.

A lot depends on how he will have prepared between 9/2007 and 3/2008. His main 'medical' problem is his knees, yet every AB last year was as an OFer. As a DH, will so much less stress on his knees, he could be better... certainly healthier.

It is a gamble? Sure. But it's one year, and he could be by far the best bang for the buck.

True, I wouldn't want him for a long term contract. But ARod is gone. Mo, Po, Andy, Jetes and the rest are also a year older. The Sox look to be better this year then last. And they still might get ARod. Frankly, I would like the division and certainly to be in the PS. Barry would make a BIG difference in the lineup.

For one year, it is a very low risk proposition. He will make much more of an impact then Roger did in 2007, and be much cheaper.

And fans WILL love watching him. It's hard not to. He works hard and is very knowledgable. He could be a very good influence on the kids. It's easy to be 'prideful' and give away 2008, but you might not feel that way in Sept., when we are in 2nd place, watching to see if the Sox can repeat.

2007-11-03 05:36:03
110.   monkeypants
109 "He could be a very good influence on the kids."

And he knows all the best doctors and pharmacists.

2007-11-03 05:36:08
111.   OldYanksFan
Boston Herald: "I still think, despite what they said, they are in the A-Rod derby," Lucchino said. "There's an ever-changing dynamic that is part of the free agent market, and that's especially true when dealing with Scott Boras clients. I just would never say never with respect to that possibility. I think at the end of the day they are a pragmatic organization that's going to do what it can to win next year."

Lucchino touched upon the general marketplace for Rodriguez, who is expected to ask for a 10-12-year deal worth approximately $30 million per year.

"I also have trouble envisioning places where A-Rod can go," Lucchino said. "What teams have the financial wherewithal, as well as the specific need? If you survey the field, there aren't that many places.

IMHO it's the Angels, Mets or Sox.

It's interesting that Lucchino says "10-12 years". I can't believe anyone will give him this. But because Boras said it, the bar is now set. If someone gets ARod for 7-8 years, they will think HA!, just like we though we got a decent deal on JD for 'only' 4 years.

Boras has balls, but gets the job done.
You can hate him, but he keeps getting it done.
I hope someone offers ARod 6/$150 to set the bar low. No way anyone thinks he's worth $30m, especially in the 2nd half of the contract. But he will probably get 8/$230, as someone will want him badly enough to (again) commit to a bad contract.

2007-11-03 06:29:48
112.   OldYanksFan
Breakfast of Champions anyone?
2007-11-03 07:54:36
113.   yankz
OK, for all the reasons to sign Barry, "good influence on the kids" is not one of them. He's a law breaker and is notoriously a jackass in the clubhouse. I'd rather they get their hitting advice from Kevin Long.
2007-11-03 09:09:03
114.   OldYanksFan
113 Well gee... when he talks with Cano and Melky, he could recommend steroids... or he could talk about picking up the spin on the ball. He might tell them where they can buy discount syringes, or he might tell them something else he has learned in playing MLB for 22 years.

Gee... I wonder which way he would go.
You guys just love to vilify whenever possible.

I guess ARod was teaching Melky and Cano how to be self obsorbed and greedy.

The man is probably the greatest baseball player in the last 50 years. He might just have something to contribute.

2007-11-03 09:21:23
115.   yankz
114 And you are obsessed with the idea that everybody who puts on pinstripes is a saint. I don't usually buy into reports of clubhouse culture because a lot goes unreported, but I don't think there's any denying that Bonds is a self-absorbed asshole (i.e. demanding certain perks like being able to have his entourage in the clubhouse or his own little TV room or whatever it was). That kind of attitude can easily rub off on young, impressionable kids.

Tell me, how much did he teach his teammates in SF to pick up spin on the ball?

I always got the impression that he kept to himself and his posse, and people didn't really want or try to associate with him. I think that would work fine with the Yankees.

2007-11-03 09:24:30
116.   JeremyM
Just read that "Love me Hate Me" book on Bonds the other day, apparently there was a game where he sat there and called every pitch a pitcher was going to throw for an inning or so. Slider, fastball, curve, whatever, he could pick up something in the pitcher's delivery and call the pitch.

Only problem is he refused to share exactly what he was picking up with his teammates.

Bonds is a great hitter and for that alone he might be worth looking into, but I don't see him having any kind of positive influence on the youngsters.

2007-11-03 09:41:33
117.   OldYanksFan
115 Did I use the word 'Saint' somewhere? Did I intimate that Bond was 'just a GREAT guy' somewhere? Did I use the words UGLY and Smell anywhere?

I think Bonds will help the team a lot, in terms of winning. I think because of his 'status' and the fact he wants to play here, that he will be radically underpriced. I think it's hard to go wrong with a one year contract. I think it's possible that other player MAY get something positive from him.

I want him because I think, unlike any year I can remember, that we don't have the best team is the AL East, and that, for many reasons, may not reach to PS.

I simply see Bonds as a way to increase our chances of getting to the PS.

I'm happy to express my feelings and debate. But I never expressed anything remotely like "And you are obsessed with the idea that everybody who puts on pinstripes is a saint." Stay on target and be accurate.

2007-11-03 09:56:40
118.   yankz
Pretty funny that you say "Stay on target and be accurate." The only thing that was being debated was your "He could be a very good influence on the kids" line. I never denied that Bonds would be a good addition (see the last line of 115 ). But as soon as 116 and I called you out on your "Barry will suddenly become a great teacher!" bit, you immediately drop it. Don't think that qualifies as "on target."
2007-11-03 09:59:05
119.   51cq24
117 you have said that fans would love to watch him and wouldn't care about his history because he's old now and it's only for one year. i will never love watching a bonds at bat. if he hits a home run to win the world series for us, part of me will think it's illegitimate. i never would argue that a healthy bonds won't help our offense, but i do think that the whole package is not worth our money. we can be spreading that money out and getting younger, more athletic players. maybe even addressing our actual needs (1b, 3b, bullpen). and as others have pointed out, the good influence thing is laughable.

111 i don't know anyone who thinks we got a decent deal on damon because it was only 4 years. in fact i think most agreed it was 2 years too many but it was necessary to get him from the sox.

2007-11-03 10:06:06
120.   vockins
I'm cool with anyone hitting .370/.582/.799 getting their own TV room and a double wide locker.
2007-11-03 10:09:28
121.   yankz
120 Good lord, I had to look that up to see if you were making it up. Wow. If he can hit like that, give him his own team bus or let him wing for Jeter or something.
2007-11-03 10:10:23
122.   OldYanksFan
Please show me what post I said:
"Barry will suddenly become a great teacher" or anything remorely like it.
I did say:
"He works hard and is very knowledgable. He could be a very good influence on the kids."
I did say:
The man is probably the greatest baseball player in the last 50 years. He might just have something to contribute.

Please tell me how those 2 statements are seen by your eyes, and your mouth says:
"Barry will suddenly become a great teacher"

If you don't agree with me, that's great. But you don't need to exaggerate or distort what I said to prove yourself correct.

Now, please tell me if you DISAGREE with the following:
The man is probably the greatest baseball player in the last 50 years. He might just have something to contribute.

2007-11-03 10:13:02
123.   51cq24
117 i also think you're putting way too much stock in his statement that called playing for the yankees "that dream." we have no idea whether he actually wants to play for the yankees. do you think he wants to play for a strict manager who is actually a couple months younger than him?
2007-11-03 10:26:14
124.   yankz
122 Sorry, but "He could be a very good influence on the kids" sounds an awful like "He would be a very good teacher to the kids." Were you joking when you said "he could talk about picking up the spin on the ball"? When you said "very good influence," did you mean that Barry would introduce them to new music and cuisine? Or, despite not having much of a community service record in SF, maybe he'll take them to soup kitchens or something?

"The man is probably the greatest baseball player in the last 50 years. He might just have something to contribute. "

Contribute- do you mean at the plate? Because I don't think anyone's denying that. Again, show me where I disagreed with that sentiment. But he didn't contribute in the clubhouse when with the Giants, so I don't know why he would start now.

This is getting petty and boring, I'm out.

2007-11-03 10:42:09
125.   OldYanksFan
Well.... sometimes famous Vets who have never who a WS might like to play for the New York Yankees. But I guess Cashman could call and say:
"Barry, would you be interested in playing for the New York Yankess?"
And then we would know.
2007-11-03 10:49:25
126.   monkeypants
122 Dude, you have to chill out a little. I was just joking around in 113 , though to be honest, you seemd to eulogize Barry a bit much in post 112 .

From a purely baseball, on-field perspective, I think signing Barry to a one-year deal would be a fantastic move. In fact, I would be willing to trade Matsui or Damon (and eat much of their salary) in order to free up a spot for him.

That said, nothing in his history indicates that he'd be a "good influence on the kids," unless by definition all great players are good models for kids to follow. Maybe he would be a role model (and I'm talking baseball, not morals), maybe he won't. But from everything I've read, he is reclusive and self-centered; I suspect that he would have little impact on the clubhouse one way or another because he probably just wouldn't talk to anybody.

2007-11-03 10:59:46
127.   yankz
126 We're the same person now? I'm so confused.
2007-11-03 11:01:22
128.   monkeypants
126 One other point-if we are talking pure baseball, you sign Barry forone year without hesitation, and give him the directory of all local pharmaceutical companies.

But a small part of me does think that some irrational factors can and should go into signing such players. The Yankees just took a beating in the press for Torregate, and I suspect that they will take another beating if they sign Barry ("look at the Yankees buying another hired gun..."). Moreover, I think that the steroids cloud around Barry is serious indeed--perhaps I am more bothered by this than others are, but that's the way I see it.

I think that you and I debated this issue earlier this year, but I for one took no joy in his relentless and (probably) chemically enhanced march through the record books. He is indeed one of the few greatest players of ALL TIME--this I willingly admit. But he has smeared his own reputation, and I don't feel one jot of sympathy if his legacy as possibly the greatest player is forever tarnished. He danced with the devil and now he pays the price in public relations.

In this context, I have little problem should the team decide that it is not "right" to pursue his services. And if they do sign him--and it would be one heckuva move--I would have a hard rooting for him or connecting with him emotionally and irrationally, as I do with other players on teh team. I would never wish him to fail, since his success helps the team, but I wouldn't feel as "good" about his HRs as I do when other members of the team succeed.

2007-11-03 11:02:01
129.   bbfan1
"Oldyanksfan:Joba and Phil are better, no question."

No way is Phil above Buccholz. I love that scouts do this for a living and put Buccholz as a possible ace and some guy in a message boards disagrees, which is fine, but adds "no question". I'd like some of whatever you're smoking.

"A rotation of Beckett, Dice-K, Wake, Buccholz, and Lester has as many ? marks as one of Pettitte, Wang, Hughes, Joba, and IPK/Moose"

No it doesn't. I pray that's the rotations that go into next season.

2007-11-03 11:02:48
130.   monkeypants
127 Don't worry, we can argue about something else. It's a long hit stove season...

: )

2007-11-03 11:17:15
131.   yankz
Jon Lester had a 3.33 ERA and a 1.31 WHIP in the minors. Not even close to the same level of Joba, Phil, or Kennedy.

Phil Hughes in the minors: 2.03 ERA, 0.86 WHIP.
Clay Buchholz: 2.46 ERA, 1.00 WHIP.

Similar, but Hughes has the edge, especially when you factor in age.

Scouting report #1 that has Phil over Buchholz:


Keep trying. Actually, don't.

2007-11-03 11:18:05
132.   yankz
130 Agreed, but I was referring to when you said "I was just joking around in 113". I wrote 113 dammit!
2007-11-03 11:19:22
133.   yankz
Oh, and Phil and Joba > Buchholz and Lester. How can that be seriously debated?
2007-11-03 11:26:03
134.   Jersey
128 Frankly, I'd be heartbroken if the House That Ruth Built became, in its final season, The House That Bonds Closed.
2007-11-03 11:29:21
135.   monkeypants
132 HA!

I was referring back to 110 , not [113}. Or maybe we are the same people. That would explain the voices in my head.

2007-11-03 11:32:18
136.   yankz
Oh, fine, here's #3:
2007-11-03 11:32:24
137.   yankz
2007-11-03 11:33:00
138.   jeterian swing
129 Baseball America's 2007 Prospect Rankings have Hughes as the 4 prospect in baseball; Buchholz at 51.

So you must be referring to other, less-reputable scouts.

2007-11-03 11:34:20
139.   yankz
138 Probably Peter Gammons. Oh, and Sons of Sam Horn, of course.
2007-11-03 12:32:22
140.   JL25and3
132 , 135 Watch out. You might both end up 134.
2007-11-03 12:35:33
141.   Zack
Just ignore the troll. He clearly surf the Banter all the time just waiting for a comment like that to "refute." Of course, his refutation of our points are exactlly what he accuses us of doing.. He says "No way is Phil above Buccholz. I love that scouts do this for a living and put Buccholz as a possible ace and some guy in a message boards disagrees, which is fine, but adds "no question". I'd like some of whatever you're smoking." And then doesn't add anything to back it up, whereas we were actually discussing things like, oh, pitches, velocity, track record and actually citing rankings, stats etc. Funny stuff!
2007-11-03 13:36:21
142.   51cq24
i think buchholz and hughes are oddly similar. both throw around 91-93, both have a great 12-6 curve and an above-average change. they had similar numbers in the minors. buchholz actually got his no hitter in his 2nd start whereas hughes got hurt in the 7th inning of his. right now, it seems people are higher on buchholz. but most people were much higher on hughes when hughes was still healthy. i think they're pretty much even. strangely even. but hughes is younger, so we win!
2007-11-03 13:44:16
143.   Marcus
142 Yeah, I agree that they are basically even. We can just sit back and watch this season and see how it plays out. There definitely isn't a clear winner of the two, but I think it is clear (as pointed out before) that Joba+Hughes > Bucholz+Lester.
2007-11-03 15:19:00
144.   Zack
142 143 Yeah, the problem is that everyone somehow seems to be confusing injured 2007 Hughes with 2006 Hughes.
2007-11-03 15:25:41
145.   Zack
hughes' 2007 Yankee #s were actually pretty good. If he can regain his form, that is, cut the BBs and HRs, which were way high for him, you'll see that era plummet. His h/9, k/9 were really good, and his whip was pretty good considering his incredibly high walk rate for him.

I don't necessarily expect Hughes to return to the sub 1 whip, 10+k/9 and ridiculous gb/fb ration, but I also expect him to get closer to those #s...

2007-11-03 15:54:10
146.   Chyll Will
135 Sorry, that was me. I'll keep it down next time >;)
2007-11-03 16:06:11
147.   monkeypants
144 145 Good points. Hughes' numbers WERE pretty good overall: league average ERA (ERA+ 100), high K, low H. His pitch counts were high, and that obvious relates to his high BB rates. And everyone seems to forget that he was seriously injured--hamstring and ankle sprain. Oh yeah, he was 21 y.o.

Let's see how he settles in next year.

2007-11-03 16:07:01
148.   monkeypants
147 Shhhhh..stop interrupting. I wasn't talking to you.
2007-11-03 16:49:38
149.   OldYanksFan
The ARod mystery continues:
I imagine just a few of the Yankees brass were in on the preliminary ARod discussions. In theory, they were going to offer 5/$150 above his current contract.
But how do we know this?
It was reported in the newspapers.
How? Who in Yankeeland would have 'leaked' this info?
Cashman? Levine? the Steinettes?
Can't see it.
Unless it was 'leaked' on purpose.
And why would that be the case?
If they thought ARod would talk to them, why leak numbers a day or 2 before.
I can't see why those numbers would have been leaked.
Was there an alternative motive?
Did the Yankees WANT ARod to turn them down?
2007-11-03 16:54:34
150.   monkeypants
149 I think that they were trying to insult A-Rod, by offering him a contract for many millions of dolars that they knew he would turn down. This fits a general pattern of abuse by DARY, who care care only about the bottom line, and are wicked and incompetent.
Show/Hide Comments 151-200
2007-11-03 16:58:36
151.   monkeypants
150 In fact, the more I think about it, the more it becomes clear that this is all part of a plan to drive out Mo and Jorge, and to insult Donnie.
2007-11-03 17:14:57
152.   Chyll Will
151 Don't be modest... you know this was all designed to drive OYF insane and for you to make friends with the voices in your head (except me, I'm already your friend >;)

Potpourri, anyone?

2007-11-03 17:16:26
153.   OldYanksFan
150 Very clever. I'm impressed. Now, try aswering the question. HOW was this info leaked? Are you telling me between Cashman and DARY they can't keep a corporate secret?

How did the 'numbers' information become public?

2007-11-03 17:21:01
154.   Chyll Will
153 PBS?
2007-11-03 17:25:51
155.   OldYanksFan
Nobody else is curious about this?
What? The Yankees have a 'media mole' in their FO?
This was confidential information.
How did it get public?
2007-11-03 17:35:19
156.   Chyll Will
155 As far as I know, the Yankees are still a privately-owned organization, so they're not required to disclose financial info regarding contracts or buyouts to the public or to the SEC; meaning that though it may have been somewhat unethical, it was not illegal. It may have been a negotiating ploy to make one side look reasonable and the other unreasonable for rejecting it.

I think when you're talking about financial figures of that magnitude, there's likely to be "dirty play" involved. Boras obviously has no qualms with this, and I doubt the Yanks have either.

2007-11-03 17:37:42
157.   Zack
150 Well played...
2007-11-03 17:38:23
158.   Zack
Gosh, was today ever a boring Yankee day or what? I kept checking the web for what I expected to be some major news or storyline relating to them and...nothing! Sigh, the best do better tomorrow!
2007-11-03 17:59:47
159.   OldYanksFan
156 So you believe it was intentionally leaked by Cashman or DARY? Besides, I don't believe a contract was involved yet. These 'numbers' were just talk at this point. I can't see ANY possible way for them to become public unless the Yankees did this on purpose.

And if they wanted ARod to talk, I see no constructive reason to 'leak' any info at all.

2007-11-03 18:00:49
160.   OldYanksFan
158 Yup.. it sure was. I wonder why we are not hearing about the Yankees talking with Posada. They have other more pressing business?
2007-11-03 18:04:30
161.   OldYanksFan
An opinion about "Barry the Yankee DH" from a Depressed Fan
2007-11-03 18:10:12
162.   OldYanksFan
"Citing league sources, reported Saturday that the Yankees are prepared to make Rodriguez an offer that will exceed, in average salary, the $27 million per season that A-Rod is scheduled to make through 2010.

The club's offer could exceed the $28 million salary that Roger Clemens earned, pro-rated after he joined the club in early June"

League sources?????
The Yankees were planning on giving ARod a raise over his current $27m salary? Really? This WAS big news.

2007-11-03 18:28:07
163.   monkeypants
153 155 I am not interested in how it was leaked, to answer on eof your questions. But more broadly, every time there is a major deal in sports, we read about it (in the form of rumors) ahead of time. Perhaps these leaks are intentional on the part of one party or another. Or maybe some intern or secretary gets paid off by a newspaper and leaks the info. Who knows, and who cares. I just don't see anything tantalizing in all of this. With major corporations employing many, many people, transacting large sum sof money, often under intense media and fan scrutiny, the surprise is not that A-Rod's offer was leaked, but that more deatils about more negotiations are leaked more frequently.
2007-11-03 18:34:59
164.   monkeypants
162 "The Yankees were planning on giving ARod a raise over his current $27m salary? Really? This WAS big news."

Sorry, you're making much ado about nothing. EVERYONE (at least on this site) figured the Yankees would offer him a "raise." This is not news, this is not surprising. As for "league sources"--what does that even mean? It's nothing. This is what I envision: John Heyman is having drinks with some league lackey, and the latter (after a few too many manhattans) mumles something like: "the commissioner figures the Yankees will offer A-Rod 30 million a year ..." Next thing we know, "league sources" are cited in the newspaper.

Or maybe there was more substance. Maybe the Yankees inquired to league offices about certain aspects of their proposed offer, to make sure that the contract would conform to the CBA or whatever, and some lackey leaked some of the deatails. Again, I just don't see too much to get worked about.

frankly, it is more plausible (in my mind) to assume a leak is "innocent" ("loose lips") or the product of incompetence, not conspiracy.

2007-11-03 18:47:12
165.   OldYanksFan
"This is not news, this is not surprising."
Just my point. This is not news, yet we read about it in the newspaper.

"... and the latter (after a few too many manhattans) mumles something like: "the commissioner figures the Yankees will offer A-Rod 30 million a year"
My guess is, 3/4 of the earths population might have guessed then same thing. So one person's opionion/guess then translates into
"the Yankees are reported to be offering..."
This is journalism? Editors runs stories based on this type of 'tips'?

Someone at NoMass offered the opinion the the Yankees themselves leaked the news of a 'not very exciting' offer, for the sole purpose of 'telling' ARod they were not really interested.

I am wondering if this might be true. If so,
1) it tells us the Yankees weren't really interested in ARod at numbers like $30m/yr
2) and therefore THEY have been disenginuous in playing the 'victim'
3) and if so, maybe ARod is not the 'greedy bastard' that he is being painted as.
4) and the Yankees were concerned about it looking like it was ARods choice and not theirs.

I don't know IF this IS the case, but I would be interested in knowing.

2007-11-03 18:48:25
166.   Chyll Will
What would be shocking is finding out the "WHO" in who is leaking such info. All the other stuff is human nature...

I say that because the work I'm doing is supposed to be confidential, yet somehow the press got a hold of some names of who and what's involved. The producers "neither confirmed nor denied any details"... I saw the names and there's no way the press could have put the pieces together by themselves. Someone who is connected, but not directly involved could have casually mentioned a thing or two about the show and dropped a name or two; a temp or ex-employee has nothing to lose by recounting their experiences to a "stranger", an inquiring mind could ask certain questions in a way that will provide answers without technically breaking confidence agreements, or someone with a knack for recognizing faces could see something and say something.

The bottom line is, there's no practical way to police information all the when there are so many people involved in the process 163 and sometimes it doesn't even take a dollar to get it. This info is not of national security; if the Yankees wanted it classified, they'd pay top-dollar for the security measures to keep it a secret. Is it worth it? Likely not, and if certain stories are true, it wouldn't have made a difference anyway.

2007-11-03 18:55:30
167.   monkeypants
165 ""This is not news, this is not surprising."
Just my point. This is not news, yet we read about it in the newspaper."

Yes, because it's the Yankees and A-Rod, the two biggest names in baseball. When there is no story, create one. Frankly, I thought the same the same thing about Torregate--about which we disagreed. I thought much of the story was the media driven, but when the layers iof rhetoric were peeled away, there just wasn't that much "news."

""the Yankees are reported to be offering..."
This is journalism? Editors runs stories based on this type of 'tips'?"

I don't know, but Cliff ran a story on this site--predicting Girardi would be the manager--based on an article by Heyman (, itself citing absolutely no evidence to support Heyman's claim that Girardi was next. I trust journalists quite little, and I trust sports journalists even less. Really, just look at many sports articles and try to find any actual evidence--whether it is statistics or actual named sources or documents.

2007-11-03 18:57:12
168.   Chyll Will
165 I don't believe that. Cash and them would certainly come to the realization that another big team could offer A-Rod at least $30/yr if they really wanted to, but not necessarily come close in years. I think his intent was to balance the dollar amount so that the average would be manageable to their future projections and still be higher than anyone else's bid, and if that wasn't acceptable, well hey nice doing business with ya.

Who is to say the Yankees actually do have the type of dollars that A-Rod wants versus what they were reportedly willing to offer? Most of this is speculation, and that's all we're doing. The papers make money on such speculation, not unlike Wall Street...

2007-11-03 19:03:50
169.   yankz
Who gives a rat's ass how it was leaked? How was it leaked that the Yankees are offering Mo 40/3? Info is always leaked. Nobody questioned it before.
2007-11-03 19:04:19
170.   Shaun P
166 Before I figured out that every one of his Jack Ryan novels had subtle digs at things at odds with his personal political philosophy, I really liked Tom Clancy. He came up with something he called Greer's law: "The likelihood of a secret's being blown is proportional to the square of the number of people who're in on it." That always made sense to me.

65 "If they (the Phillies) did nab A-Rod they would have arguably the greatest infield of all time: A-Rod, Rollins, Utley, Howard. That team might score 1000 runs."

Maybe this was so obvious no one felt the need to say it, but I had to say something.

As soon as I read tommyl's 65 , I thought - but that's exactly what people thought about Texas with A-Rod, and of course they never won because they never had enough (or any) pitching.

How funny is it that history could repeat itself, the Phillies have no pitching (outside of Hamels, since they stupidly want to keep Myers in the bullpen).

I'd laugh if A-Rod went to Philly, and the team fell to pieces because they had no pitching. The Philly Phans and media would tear A-Rod to pieces, and his legacy as a "team-killer" would be set in stone (no matter how untrue it was).

2007-11-03 19:06:05
171.   monkeypants
Changing subjects...what is with the discussion (not serious, though, it seems) of moving Cano to third? OK, there is a major hole at 3B...but who figures moving Cano to 3B is a viable solution, since it just creates another hole at 2B? Are there more FA 2B than 3B?
2007-11-03 19:14:04
172.   jonm
150 I know you're kidding about the insult bit, but Tim Marchman at the NY Sun actually wrote a column this week saying just that:
2007-11-03 19:16:41
173.   monkeypants
172 Sweet...when parody becomes reality...
2007-11-03 19:24:24
174.   OldYanksFan
167 There is a difference between an OPINION piece and documented news. Thinking that Girardi is the best candidate is an Opinion, having some tabngible evidence is news.

166 True Chyll, but you are involved in a production that has MANY people involved. If you, I, sliced and monkeypants sit in a private board room and throw around some numbers on what to offer ARod, who else should know? There was no need for papers being typed up, there was no contract. This should have been very preliminary discussions about concepts. They hadn't even met with ARod yet. Furthermore, if the Yanks did NOT want premature speculation, they certainly could have kept these discussions confidential. This was got a government bill, where dozens of people were involved in documentation. This was (I would guess) a private, preliminary discussion.

2007-11-03 19:31:53
175.   yankz
I think if Arod wanted to stay but was unhappy with the rumored offer, he would have talked to the Yankees about it.
2007-11-03 19:32:24
176.   OldYanksFan
168 I don't understand. You don't believe what? I want to know why this info was 'leaked'. I have to believe the Yankees could have kept this private if they wanted to. And if it was leaked, what did the Yankees hope to gain? News is usually leaked for a reason, usually to gauge public perception or stir the public up. I still can't figure out how the Yankees prosper from this info going public.
2007-11-03 19:34:32
177.   monkeypants
174 But Heyman's article on Girardi was not presented as an opinion piece. The headline ran 'Yankees leaning toward Girardi;" The piece was presented as heyman breaking insider news, but only when you looked carefully at the story did the careful reader notice there was not real evidence. Similarly, in Heyman's story about the proposed A-Rod extension, his only "evidence" is the statement is "it is believed."

"It is believed"--what does that mean? By whom? the Yankees? Heyman? The guy at the end of the bar? Yet this passes as investigative sports journalism.

The irony is that you, by posing your serious questions, have bought into the "story" hook, line and sinker. And more ironic, by writing lengthy replies I have been drawn in as well.

2007-11-03 19:37:04
178.   51cq24
uh, perhaps i'm being slow, but i just don't understand what the point is about the "leak" or whatever. maybe the yankees leaked it, maybe someone else did. but what bearing does it have on their negotiations with arod? he heard what the media was reporting and decided to not meet with them? that can't seriously be what you're saying, can it? am i missing something? if this is a conspiracy, a conspiracy to do what exactly? 175 seems reasonable to me.
2007-11-03 19:40:43
179.   51cq24
oh, and another thing. your entire theory seems premised on an assumption: "I imagine just a few of the Yankees brass were in on the preliminary ARod discussions." 149 . maybe you're wrong? but the bigger question is 178 . what were they trying to do by leaking it?
2007-11-03 19:43:22
180.   monkeypants
176 Your operating assumption is that the Yankees could have kept the figure secret if they wanted. Thus, since the info got out, it must have been leaked by the Yankees. Thus, you are compelled to question to what end the leak.

But this seems like an occam's razor to me. The simpler solution is that the Yankees could not keep the information secret (as 166 suggests). Thus, the leak need not have eminated from "the Yankees," and thus the question of their motives evaporates.

Is it really this slow of a day in Yankee land? Can we go back to arguing about Hughes and Buccholz?

2007-11-03 19:45:59
181.   51cq24
171 i don't really get that either. can't we smuggle in the cuban phenom gourriel?
2007-11-03 20:00:21
182.   Chyll Will
176 Perhaps your reading way to much into all this. It could be very simple, there doesn't necessarily have to be a scientific explanation for how and why the info was linked (I wonder what Tommyl and mehmattski would say on the subject), but if you think there's a multi-layered conspiracy involved, I'm up for a good story.

174 Who do you think is bandying such numbers around? That means we have a very likely idea of who the leak is. Then what? Do you fire him/her, knowing that he/she is a high-level exec who has intimate knowledge of the inner workings of the system, or do you look at it and say, "well, it's all theoretical, so what the hell?' They could have been making the bid up. That A-Rod/Boras reacted to it the way they did by opting out immediately (if it was a direct reaction at all) says more about A-Rod's intentions to opt out under any circumstance than for the Yankees' bumbling with sensitive information.

The question then is, with all this information and counterintelligence from both sides of the table, who do you believe? Did he opt out because of the impending offer, or did he always intend to opt out?

Ultimately, I don't care, the question is moot.

2007-11-03 20:04:57
183.   Chyll Will
181 If you can believe anyone nowadays, Cano's staying put. Cash said he was was joking with him, which to me means he could reserve the right to change his mind in ST as a last resort. At any rate, don't expect anything like that to happen soon.
2007-11-03 20:15:10
184.   yankz

" As for Posada and Rivera, who are unsigned free agents, Steinbrenner said General Manager Brian Cashman had given him positive progress reports.

"Things are looking fine with Rivera and Posada," Steinbrenner said, adding that the Yankees had made a formal offer to Posada and an informal one to Rivera, who met with ownership last week in Tampa, Fla. "Obviously, we want both of them back. We've always made that clear with our offers.""

From the horse's mouth. Looking good.

2007-11-03 21:14:33
185.   yankz
Torre on Letterman:

2007-11-03 21:45:58
186.   thelarmis
thanks for the youtube link, yankz! from a strictly personal stance, not baseball, i will certainly miss Papa Joe...
2007-11-03 21:47:50
187.   tommyl
182 Been a bit busy and hence away for a few days. What am I supposed to think about what? :)
2007-11-03 21:56:07
188.   mehmattski
182 Yeah, what now? On the basis of the number of Jagerbombs I've ingested, I'm declaring the scientific theory of leaking to be squarely in the realm of physics, not biology. Take it away, tommyl...
2007-11-03 23:42:12
189.   yankz
You know what I just remembered? About a decade ago (back when the Yanks were sitting on #23), I read in the Guinness Book of World Records that "L.A." is the shortest abbreviation in the world in terms of % of overall letters. It was originally named "El Pueblo de Nuestra Señora la Reina de los Ángeles de Porciúncula."

Well, I just had a funny thought that it's probably about 5 years until they're renamed the "El Pueblo de Nuestra Señora la Reina de los Ángeles de Porciúncula Angels of Anaheim."

2007-11-04 04:08:49
190.   OldYanksFan
185 Really, the guy should run for office. I agree, I am excited about Girardi and the youth movement. But everytime I see or hear Torre, I just swell with respect for the guy, and miss him like hell. Makes a comment about when Bonds was 'skinny' but mentions he also won 4 MVPs before the 'issue' started. Doesn't trash anyone, isn't defensive. States his facts but then also states the other side's facts. Wow. Send him over to the Middle East and see what he can do.

Breakfast of Champions:
OK, I did Barry... no one interested.
I did Yankee conspiracy... boring.
Thought I'd generate hundres of scathing comments. No suck luck.

Someone better get creative. We have at least a month to fill with nothing but the Mo and Po signings coming.

Osama at 3rd? Common guys, lets not let the banter die just cause snow is coming.

2007-11-04 04:48:20
191.   Raf
190 Hell, I'm just getting back from a week in Peru. Awful lot of news to digest upon my return.
2007-11-04 05:13:39
192.   OldYanksFan
NY Times: Pettitte has until Wednesday — 10 days after the end of the World Series — to decide whether to exercise his $16 million option or become a free agent.

But Pettitte has already made it clear that he will play for the Yankees or retire, and Hank Steinbrenner said he could exceed the 10 days and still be welcomed back.

"As far as I'm concerned, he can take longer than that to decide, as far as coming back to the Yankees," Steinbrenner said. "He can take the time he wants, because we really want him back."

Steinbrenner praised Pettitte's talent and leadership and said he understood Pettitte's desire to be around his family more often. Steinbrenner said he was not suggesting the Yankees offer a Roger Clemens-style "family plan," in which Pettitte could leave the team on the days he does not pitch, but he said the Yankees "can make sure that he gets plenty of family time."

Wow... Steinbrenner saying the right things. This may be hard to get used to.

2007-11-04 06:03:36
193.   ms october
192 I know - He even said "I have absolutely no comment on that at this time," about Arod coming back at a "discount." Strange times indeed. And don't worry OYF, I think we will have enough to sustain us for the next few months - there will be all kinds of crazy rumors from the winter meetings; we can always talk about Austin Jackson and when he will be ready and which other prospects can be actual ML players; as well as how stupid (fill in the GMs name) is for giving (player) a ? year contract for ? million.
2007-11-04 06:07:24
194.   Chyll Will
187 ,188 Never mind guys, just trying to help OYF. I actually agree with your sentiment >;)

190 Bronx Banter fool! we don't die, we multiply! (um, sorry, that's more of in DT's geographic realm)

2007-11-04 06:16:02
195.   tommyl
194 188 Haha, and here I was doing my actual work. Sorry for slacking off guys.
2007-11-04 06:48:58
196.   OldYanksFan
193 Tis a good topic and worth discussing. Do we have ANY POSITION players on the farm that might be able to play on the Yankees in 2008? Is Brett Gardner (24) still on the radar? Does Austin Jackson (20) make him expendable?

The 2 studs are Miranda (24+) and Tabata. Might they be here in 2009? Miranda is no baby. Could we see him in Sept?

And here's something that might actually happen under Girardi... considering we are losing Giambi and Abreu after 2008, and maybe Mats and JD after 2009, and that many positions will be in flux.... we may actually see Jeter moved off of SS. But where?
3rd? 2nd and Cano to 3rd? 1st? OF? Where can we put Jetes where he might actually not be a black hole defensively?

I think 1st, with Posada being BUC and DH (in 2009 or 2010)

2007-11-04 06:50:27
197.   Simone
182 Exactly. The leaked contract offer is irrelevant. Alex Rodriguez didn't return the calls of the Steinbrenner brothers and opted out as soon as he could. He clearly had no intention of negotiating with the Yankees.

There is a lot of denial going around about Alex Rodriguez and intentions re: the Yankees. I just read the most ridiculous comment in the NY Times' sports section this morning by someone named Gordon about Alex wanting to play for the Yankees so they should enter the bidding for his services. Talk about deluded. I agree with Pete Abraham on this one, Alex Rodriguez will play for the highest bidder and the Yankees would be crazy to let him use them as leverage to he can stick it to them even more.

2007-11-04 06:53:38
198.   OldYanksFan
Brand new website.
2007-11-04 06:57:51
199.   OldYanksFan
197 If no one offers ARod more then 8/$240, will he come back to the Yankees and give them last shot? I agree, they should NOT say a single word about ARod. But when it's all done, do the Yankees take a 'parting' shot?

And I say the Red Sox are very into ARod.
If so, do WE live with 'the Curse of the ARod'?

2007-11-04 07:06:18
200.   OldYanksFan
I have no idea who this guy is, but he basically states what I said is a POSSIBILITY a few days ago. Actually manages to spin the WS announcement into it to.
Show/Hide Comments 201-250
2007-11-04 07:31:26
201.   JeremyM
192 Hank is really playing that well, this is the exact opposite of what was done in 2003.
2007-11-04 07:43:35
202.   Simone
199 First, Alex will get his money. Secondly, he isn't coming back the Yankees, period. The man gave the Yankees, the NY media and fans who ragged on him for years, the finger. He is NOT coming back no matter what. He will simply use any interest that the Yankees show for leverage to move on to another team.

200 As I said previously, that guy is beyond deluded. I don't know how he can be a law professor. Usually, they slap that stupidity and wishful thinking out of your head in the first year of law school.

2007-11-04 07:51:02
203.   jeterian swing
200 It's an interesting theory but it conveniently ignores many of the realities of the Yankees' stake here -- so much so that I wouldn't be surprised if the story itself were somehow planted by Boras. For instance, this section:

"Assume some other team, call them the Dodgers, were to offer Rodriguez $32 million a year for eight years. Remember that the Dodgers are receiving no part of the Rangers' booty. Is it really the Yankees' position that Rodriguez is worth more to the Dodgers than to the Yankees? If the Dodgers can afford to pay the $32 million a year, can the Yankees — the richest franchise in sports — plead poverty?"

That's specious logic. It assumes that A-Rod is ACTUALLY worth $32 mil to ANY team; it doesn't take into account either team's short- or long-range plans, nor their current payroll structures: By opting out in this fashion (and expecting a longer deal worth more money and minus the Rangers' subsidies), A-Rod doesn't only demand more money from the Yankees, he also demands that the Yankees pay substantially more lux-tax $$$ -- the Dodgers have no such constraints. Also? Ned Colletti is not, shall we say, the Moneyballingest of GMs: He regularly gives out ill-advised contracts. Should the Yankees give out WORSE contracts to flex their financial muscle? Hey LA went five years on Juan Pierre -- we could have given him six! We're the Yankees! Etc, etc. A-Rod is four years past his physical peak -- any long-term deal with him is going to yield diminishing returns. He doesn't deserve a raise (unless you're paying him on past accomplishments, not future ones); if the Dodgers give him one...well, it would fit right in with the Dodgers' "plan." I for one hope the Yankees have more sober visions of the future.

2007-11-04 07:55:41
204.   ms october
196 I have read mixed reviews on Miranda - not sure how seriously to take a lot of that stuff, but ...
Lot of Gardner as a 4th outfielder, but I think he can be useful.
It sounds like the Yanks can have a pretty good outfield by 2009.
The infield prospects seem iffier or non-existant.

202 Yeah seriously where did they find this law professor - and if I'm Columbia that's the last time he is allowed to write for the NYT. Almost nothing he says makes sense.

2007-11-04 07:55:57
205.   Chyll Will
203 Second.
2007-11-04 07:57:47
206.   Sarasota
....what jumps out at me is that I don't recall ever seeing so much negative press re: a player and his agent. It's almost unanimous.
2007-11-04 08:02:09
207.   Chyll Will
206 They've done this before, it's old hat to them when you think about it. In that regard, I don't think either of them are phased by the vitriol. I'm just waiting for theirs and the newspapers' hallucinations to dissipate before ST.
2007-11-04 08:06:06
208.   ms october
206 yeah -even terrell owens and drew rosenhaus have not gotten it this bad. i think by announcing the opt-out on the day of the wolrd series it gave all the holier than thou types as well as those in the media that do not care for alex and boras the perfect opportunity to lay into 2 people that they have been wanting to rip for quite some time. also, all of the other agents that either don't like boras's tactics or are jealous of him now have more of a platform to stand on; not to mention all the teams that don't like doing business with boras. it's basically the perfect storm of disliking or despising two people and having the complete ability to knock them.
2007-11-04 08:07:20
209.   JL25and3
202 Well, we still don't know what's in Alex's mind. I take everything that Boras does - everything - as a negotiating ploy, not any statement of principle on his or Rodriguez's part. Clearly, they want to find out just how much they can make, and they're not coming to back at any sort of discount. But it's perfectly possible that they'll offer the Yanks a chance to match any other offer, and come back if that works.

It's also not clear to me that they completely refused to negotiate with the Yankees. Boras refused to allow them to talk money face-to-face with Rodriguez, and apparently refused to negotiate below a certain minimum (though I'm not sure which side that info comes from; could be spin). That's not quite the same thing.

Delusion is a systematic belief that's contrary to fact, not one that's contrary to inference and supposition.

2007-11-04 08:08:01
210.   ms october
208 * but i do agree with chyll that neither are phased by this.
2007-11-04 08:08:45
211.   Sarasota
207 you are probably right; the acrymony sells papers and TV air time. They eventually will either get over the vitriol and make a deal or not.
2007-11-04 08:17:39
212.   ms october
209 I agree with a lot of what you are saying. But do you think that by opting out the second they could Alex/Boras were going for more than attention - they were sending a message (as part of as you say a "negotiating ploy") to the Yanks that they (the Yankees) cannot dictate whether or not Alex opts-out?
All the speculation is moot if he has no intention of wanting to come back and play for the Yanks - then it is clear that he opted out the second he could to move on in all senses of the word. If he does want to come back at least somewhat, then the why of it all means a little more.
2007-11-04 08:19:28
213.   OldYanksFan
203 I think you are missing to point, which I believe is that the $21m the Yankees 'lost' is not the issue, but Cashman specifically made that the issue. If you like, substitute $27m instead of $32. The number is just-a-for-instance. The point is why should the Yankees NOT be able to bid on equal footing with other teams?

Here's what I don't get.
ARod IS concerned with what people think about him. So much so, it was a topic of many conversations here. How many times did we 'tell' ARod to STFU and ignor the media?
So how does ARod possibly do the WS announcement thing? It had ZERO positive value and tons of negative value. I'm NOT defending him here as much as I just don't get it. It does not make any sense to me.

Saying ARod is an attention hog just doesn't explain it. You mean, ARod is not getting enough attention as it is? You mean if he did NOT shit on the WS, he would not still be the lead story in every NY paper?

I haven't read much about how greedy J.D. Drew is, or Sori, or Zito (who went to a dying team) or Meche (another 'great' team).

We have been told that ARod has a lot of respect for the game, and it's history. Aside from raping a nun, could ARod possibly have done anything more self-destructive then the WS thing?

202 "... the guy is beyond deluded". Simone, can you come up with a logical debate of the specifics of what he said? You're statement is just a sweeping condemnation, without anything behind it. JS, in 203 did, but IMHO was off point.

All I can say is, if all this is really on ARod and not Boras, the right word would not be greedy but 'stupid beyond imagination'.

Lastly, I read a number of financial evaluations of ARod's worth. BP, which is pretty respected, put his worth at $25m/yr over 8 years, based on VORP alone. Nothing about selling seats, merchandise, publicity for the Yankees, legacy, or most importantly, the extra $$$ the Yankees make for every single PS game they play. I will say that ARod is almost singlehandedly the 'difference' in 2005 and 2007 for the 8 PS games the Yankees did play. How much did the Yankees make on those 8 games? Millions? 5 million per year?

If BP is correct, and ARod is worth $25m/yr on VORP only, then $30m is certainly in the ballpark.

2007-11-04 08:28:23
214.   OldYanksFan
209 Well said. I'm not really sure if we know any 'hard' facts at all. What we have seen so far may be pure 'Hollywood'.

206 Boras makes A-Rod look bad - by Mike Lupica
Well, I guess the fact that it's Lupica means it's probably worthless, but many in the press (that I've read) think this is all Boras, and maybe even Boras making mistakes.
ARod's father abandoned him when he was 4. He is now 32. Boras has been his 'agent' for 15 years. Think about that and how much influence Boras might have over ARod.

2007-11-04 08:29:32
215.   OldYanksFan
Does anyone know what Boras's commission is? 10%? 15%? Anyone know?
2007-11-04 08:30:49
216.   JL25and3
212 I'm not saying that the "why" doesn't matter, just that there's really no way for us to know what that "why" is. Speculation is entirely valid, and fun, and something to keep us busy for the next 103 days (by my count). I just don't think that it should be confused with fact.
2007-11-04 08:34:56
217.   yankz
214 Are you kidding me? Yes, when Boras says jump, Arod asks how high. Give me a break. Arod runs his own business. Read LoHud's take on it- much more reasonable than assuming Arod will sign anywhere because "Daddy" said so.
2007-11-04 08:45:53
218.   OldYanksFan
I didn't say ARod will sign anywhere. What I'm saying is that ARod tells Boras what he wants and Boras says "OK Kid, I'll get you there and get you well paid also. Trust me. This is what I do".

It's ARods boat, but I think Boras is driving.

212 I think that article gives a very plausable explaination for the 'instant opt out'. How's this. Let's say Boras tell ARod he does NOT want to play for the Yankees. If I'm Boras, here what I do.

1) Tell the Yankees he WANTS to play in NY, but also wants to be highly paid. ARod should get the $21m from Texas, not the Yankees.
2) Negotiate with the Yankees.
3) Get the highest offer they can. Drag it out. Squeeze every buck out of the Yankees they can.
4) Then tell the Yankees it not enough.
5) Then go to other teams and show/tell them the Yankee offer and and 'we think Alex is worth a little more. The Yankees didn't. How about you?"

NOT negotiating with the Yanks will NOT help ARod get more money. Negotiating WOULD!

2007-11-04 08:56:40
219.   jeterian swing
213 I think I missed that BP piece (link?), but I'd like to see that argument drawn out to include further contingencies. Maybe A-Rod IS worth 25/yr based on projected VORP, and maybe an extra 7 mil (plus the lump sum's lux-tax implications) IS small potatoes to the Yanks when A-Rod-related revenue is taken into account, but that's putting a lot of eggs into one projected-VORP basket, is it not? If A-Rod suffers any sort of physical breakdown (which is a virtual lock) or -- god forbid -- a career-ending or -altering injury, then all that is out the window (you'll get minimal coverage on any A-Rod insurance policy). Also, let's say A-Rod averages out to a 50 VORP to the end of that contract (that would be insanely high, but he had something like a 96 VORP last year, so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt). Does BP somewhere assert that the Yankees can't get a combined 60 or 70 (or better) VORP on that $25 (actually $32) by using it on more players over shorter-term deals? A-Rod may be worth $25 (or $32+lux-tax) mil over 8 yrs--but is that the MOST EFFICIENT way the Yanks might spend $32+ mil per year over the next 8 yrs? (I'm not being combative -- I'm honestly asking here.)
2007-11-04 09:00:12
220.   yankz
I'm confused as to why this all matters? I mean- he's gone. Maybe he'll be back, but I doubt it. Either way, it doesn't matter. I can't believe we're this bored and it's only like 7 days since the season ended.
2007-11-04 09:04:46
221.   Nick from Washington Heights
"NOT negotiating with the Yanks will NOT help ARod get more money. Negotiating WOULD!"

I'm not a negotiating expert by any means, but couldn't the counter argument be that by not allowing the Yanks to make an offer, Boras and A-Rod get to set the market's starting point, not the Yanks? Boras didn't want any numbers leaked because he believes that the greater number of teams involved in the bidding, the higher the bid. The gamble is that he and A-Rod have alienated the highest potential bidder in the Yanks. But at the same time, by immediately bringing it to the market, the cost is more reflective of A-Rod's true value, which Boras obviously thinks is high. If you let the Yanks set the market, then it is either artifically lowered or escalated. Remember, the Yanks, in a blind bid for Dice-K, were third or fourth place despite being the wealthiest team in baseball. In other words, there's no reason to think the Yanks' offer would be reflective of the maximum A-Rod can make.

2007-11-04 09:05:15
222.   ms october
215 According to the New Yorker article it is 5% on his major league clients - which this year totaled $295 million - and he also takes 5% on the signing bonuses of draftees (p.4)

216 218 my point was just that whether or not alex wanted to definitelty NOT return to the yankees (which is certainly a possibility) or whether he wanted to return to some degree, would impact the whole process. imo - if he has absolutely no desire to come back it doesn't matter when he opted-out. although he would prefer to get the yanks involved in a bidding war regardless of whether he intends to come back - the yanks were not invloved when he got the texas contract. if he really wants to come back or mostly wants to come back - i still haven't figured out or seen someone else's explanation that makes sense to me on why he opted out so fast.

2007-11-04 09:13:34
223.   OldYanksFan
219 I personally am not arguing for or against. I'm just saying as CRAZY as $30m seems, it's not that crazy.

For me, it's ARods legacy as a Yankee that I think is important. It's really hard to put a $$ value on that. I do think he will sell a lot of seats. If he ever does approach Bond's HR records, it will be all-ARod-all-the-time. How much is it worth for him to go into the HOF as a Yankee... as opposed to as a Red Sox?

The truth is, simply because the Yankees are the Yankees (history, tradition, NY, etc), because (especially with ARod) they are perennial PS players, because we are worth more then twice as much as any other team (and what if you add 4 billion worth of YES in there)... the truth is ARod has more value to us then any other team.... except for MAYBE the Red Sox. And of course, if we lose ARod and the Sox get him.... well, I don't even want to think about that.

Might we agree that Alex is a once in a lifetime player? How do you put a value on that.

If ARod goes to the Sox, if ARod breaks Bonds, or even Ruths HR record, the ARod from the Yanks-to-the-Sox will replace the Babe deal as the worst in sports history.

2007-11-04 09:16:04
224.   Nick from Washington Heights
223 A-Rod might be more valuable to the Yanks than other teams but $30 mil a year also costs more for the Yanks than for other teams. The luxury tax can be a deterrent.
2007-11-04 09:21:13
225.   51cq24
200 gordon is a corporate law, mergers and acquisitions etc professor. i imagine he knows something about this, though i don't know him. i think his argument may be right so far as it shows that arod didn't mean to take the yankees out of the running. i can see how the evidence he points to might show that arod doesn't want to leave the yankees. but i don't see how he then asserts that arod actually wants to be with the yankees. because he announced the opt out during the world series to avoid making it seem like he was rejecting girardi as a manager? maybe he hoped to avoid alienating the yankees and their new manager. but i don't see how that means he wants to be here next year. and i think if he does want to be here next year, he made a huge mistake because the yankees are not going to negotiate with him anymore.
2007-11-04 09:27:31
226.   51cq24
223 "The truth is, simply because the Yankees are the Yankees (history, tradition, NY, etc), because (especially with ARod) they are perennial PS players..."

i know what you mean, that arod makes them a better team. but how can you talk about the tradition of the yankees and then in the same sentence say that the yankees are perennial postseason players especially with arod? he was only on the team for 4 years, and was great in only 2 of them. i know how much value arod has. i know that all else being equal, he makes the team better. but aren't you exaggerating a little? can't we spread all that money out to different positions, and then be in even better shape than we were with him? it's at least possible.

2007-11-04 09:32:14
227.   jeterian swing
223 That's extreme and, I think, inaccurate: When Ruth came to the Yanks, baseball and America were still being defined, and Ruth came to be a defining figure for both. I do not believe A-Rod will ever have such cultural or historical impact.

As a Yankee fan, I do not want to see A-Rod in Boston because he will give the Sox a substantial advantage next year: A lineup including Manny, Papi and A-Rod seems virtually invincible. But after next year, Manny will be gone, and a lineup featuring A-Rod (at 34) and Papi is not much more dominant than the one the Sox have had for the last four years. If we spend our money wisely, we can do better. (The records are irrelevant to me and trying to calculate their value now means assuming A-Rod stays healthy without performance-enhancing drugs: not a safe assumption when concerning a 32-year-old man who plays professional sports.)

I do agree though that A-Rod is a once-in-a-lifetime player (ready to enter his decline phase) and the most obvious fit for his services is the Yanks: We have money, and we need a 3B and a RH power source. It's actually a perfect fit, when you put it that way...

2007-11-04 09:37:58
228.   OldYanksFan
225 I'll put another spin on it.
The following all assumes 2 things, which of course may be wrong. But for sake of argument:
1) ARod wants to be a Yankee
2) ARod wants to maximize his worth, by seeing what he is worth on the open market.

Cashman said he won't 'be part of the ARod bidding wars'. And so far, he isn't.
Cashman basically said they will make ARod a good offer, and that will be it.
So far, they have yet to make ARod, in person, an offer.

ARod 'plays the field'. His BEST offer (for example) is 8/$255.

He now goes to Cashman. He has a contact that he signed. It says the Yankees can have him for 8/$256.

He says "I want to retire a Yankee. If the Yankees WANT ME, they can have me for 8/$256"
Deal or no Deal.
No negotiations. Yes or No.
This will be Cashmans first chance.
ARod has 8/$255 sitting on the table. If Cashman say yes, he's a Yankee. If no, he'll take his 8/$255.

Cashman saves face. He does NOT go back on anything he said. Examine his quotes.

IF he had FIRST negotiated with Cashman, and then took that offer and 'played the field', Cashman would be pissed! Arod would have turned him down and used to Yankees offer to set the bar for other teams. This would have been JUST what Cashman wanted to avoid.

Now, I ARod does NOT want to play for the Yanks, the above is all meaningless. But if he does, but wants MAXIMUM dollars in the process, then this is the way to do it.

2007-11-04 09:48:13
229.   JL25and3
226 He may only have been great 2 of those years, if "great" means an MVP season. In his worst years he's still really, really excellent. WARP says he was worth more than any other Yankee save Rivera in 2004. Last year his overall value was dragged down by his fielding, but I think that was prettu clearly an aberration.

The "spread around the money" idea assumes that (a) two guys who hit 25 HR each are worth one guy who hits 50, and (b) that the Yankees can't do both, especially considering the amount of salary coming off the books in the next coupld of years.

2007-11-04 09:52:10
230.   OldYanksFan
226 Because the Yankees SHOULD be a parennial PS team without ARod. If so, they certainly should be with him. Make sense? Again, the Yanks might make the PS every year without him... but he is a little insurance. I don't know the exact money the PS brings in, but it's big. They gave Clemens (a pro rated) $28m this year!

Again, I am not an accountant. But I suspect if the Yankees next 8 years WITH ARod are like the last 12 (however... with different PS outcomes), then I don't think money is the issue. I mean, what if they replace his $30m with a player for $15m. Is that different REALLY that much, with all the other factors in play?

And I ask this in all honesty. I don't know the answer.
If he's worth $30m to theAngels or Red Sox, is that a mistake??? or is he worth that muich to the Yankees?

2007-11-04 09:52:24
231.   BatgirlReneeNYC
I apologize if this article has been posted already but I thought I'd mention it just in case:
(It's from today-NY Times)
2007-11-04 09:57:11
232.   OldYanksFan
We need to remember we are NOT talking about trading Hughes or Joba or IPK or Melky or A.Jackson. We are talking about MONEY. DOLLARS. The Yankees are worth over a BILLION. I read that YES is worth about 4 BILLION.

The Yankees are the most known sports franchise on the planet.

What is the issue here. $15-$20m a year or WINNING? $15-$20m a year or having the GREATEST PLAYERS?

Are we Billy Beane? Do we put together a team based on best bang for the buck? or just the best?

2007-11-04 10:06:10
233.   yankz
OYF, you seem to be let down by the lack of feedback you're getting. I really, really don't mean this to be an insult- but the LoHud commenters are breaking down Arod, Boras, and the decision not to bring him back.
2007-11-04 10:06:19
234.   jeterian swing
229 Well, your calculation assumes that A-Rod will not only hit 50 HRs next year, but will continue to do so every year over the length of the deal, which is an unrealistic assumption. (As Rob Neyer put it, A-Rod is just as likely to hit 35 HRs next year as he is to hit 50.) Look at his PECOTA comps: Aside from Dave Winfield (his #7 comp), none have had productive careers past age 35. PECOTA also predicts him to have a VORP of 22.0 in 2011 -- at age 35! (By comparison, Ryan Church had a VORP of 22.2 in 2007.) His abilities at 3rd aren't going to improve over time, so eventually you'll have to move him to DH or OF, presumably further diminishing his VORP. If we could find two players to combine for 50 HRs per year for the next eight years, we would not only be getting more production than we would from A-Rod, we would have markedly greater flexibility.
2007-11-04 10:09:16
235.   Zack
Back to the Gardner bit--he could very well be the Yanks 4th outfielder this year, providing a lot of speed off the bench etc, but thats only if Melky gets shipped out of course...
2007-11-04 10:11:42
236.   OldYanksFan
233 No... I just got nothing better to do.
2007-11-04 10:22:06
237.   OldYanksFan
My Bad. Not BP but David Pinto.
Eight years, $216 million should suffice for A-Rod
Oops... $27m/yr based on VORP, not $25m
2007-11-04 10:33:01
238.   OldYanksFan
Roger: Talk about wasting money.

The deal elicited predictable outrage from some. A blogger on Google complained the Yankees are "destroying baseball through irrational spending." The New York Times proclaimed the Yankees were "paying dearly in desperation."

Sure it's a lot of money, but was it really irrational? Fortune asked Gennaro to apply his analysis to the Clemens deal, as if he had been advising the Yankees front office about whether or not to sign the pitcher.

Clemens will cost the Yankees $26.1 million this year - his salary of $18.7 million plus a $7.5 million tax the team will pay MLB for exceeding a certain salary threshold, the so-called luxury tax. Gennaro estimates that Clemens will add six wins to the team. The model is based on the assumption Clemens will perform as he has in the recent past - an admittedly iffy proposition for a soon-to-be 45-year-old pitcher.

Those six wins, by Gennaro's model, would catapult the team from a projected 90 wins to 96, a jump that could very well mean the difference between going home in October and going to the postseason. A 90-win team has just a 31 percent chance of going to the post season in the American League, while a 96-win team has an 81 percent shot.

In other words, the deal elevated the Yankees' chances of reaching the postseason this year by 50 percent. Still think the signing was irrational?

Gennaro's estimate of the revenue impact from signing Clemens is $24.1 million, factoring in things like ticket sales, concessions, television ratings, sponsorships and postseason revenue. This doesn't necessarily mean that an extra $24 million will flow in to the Yankees coffers from Clemens taking the mound, but Gennaro said, "the Yankees do stand to lose this much if they don't make the post season."

Boy, would I love to see this analysis on ARod.

2007-11-04 10:47:56
239.   jeterian swing
237 I love David Pinto, but that piece is fundamentally flawed: It begins and ends on the assumption that A-Rod's VORP will decline by 10 percent per year starting with A-Rod's inhuman 2007 VORP of 97. By Pinto's calculations, A-Rod's VORP in 2013 (at age 38) would be 51.56. By comparsion, A-Rod's actual VORP in 2006 at age 31 was 51.6. Wha?! He's going to be as good at age 38 as he was at age 31?? As a 3rd baseman??? And he's going to be demonstrably better than that at ages 34-37???? That's wrong -- only Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens have had that sort of growth pattern, and at least one of those players used a banned substance to do so. Pinto's numbers are crazily off-base here, so much so that the article is worthless -- I'd like to see these numbers recalculated using A-Rod's 2008 PECOTA, but by my guess, he's actually worth MUCH LESS than 27 mil per year starting as soon as 2010.
2007-11-04 11:11:24
240.   OldYanksFan
239 Good read. 2006 was a down year, but 2007 was close to a career year. Although 238 may be more important. Is it telling us the the PS is worth $20m or more? Of course, that would need to be broken down into ALDS, ALCS and WS numbers. Whatever the numbers are, I would guess they would go up over the next 8 years.
2007-11-04 15:27:35
241.   jonm
239 Good point. Projecting that sort of linear decline is not the best way to do it, but, still, the perspective is valuable because that estimation could be seen as a best case scenario.

As this has gone on, and the more I've thought about it, I just have started to think that the Yankees dodged a bullet with that contract offer. Adding a 40% luxury tax, and given the Yankees' attendance projections and the limited room for YES growth, I don't see how signing A-Rod to that extension could have not been a very imprudent decision.

2007-11-04 16:00:28
242.   JL25and3
234 That's OK, because the 25-HR guys might only hit 17 or 18.

The general point still holds, though: two merely good players don't replace a great one, particularly on offense.

It's possible that Rodriguez is sufficiently overpriced as to weaken my argument. After all, it's one thing to say that two $10M players can't replace Manny Ramirez - which is pretty obviously the case. $15M, on the other hand, can buy a lot of ballplayer - there are only a handful of guys who make that much (and half of them are Yankees).

But there's a fallacy there, too: it assumes that you can find, and acquire, two $15M players who are actually worth that much (as opposed to Richie Sexson or Mike Hampton).

Mike Lowell and Barry Bonds? Maybe.

In any case, I think it's clearly ridiculous to talk about paying Rodriguez that kind of money for 10 years, or even 7.

2007-11-04 17:13:02
243.   Hugh Jorgan
"The Yankees are the most known sports franchise on the planet"

Manchester United and Real Madrid disagree with you, and have the jersey sales worldwide to back up their position.

2007-11-04 17:13:24
244.   monkeypants
241 Maybe it's rationalization, but I am coming around to this line of thinking as well. Now, I do believe that had the YAnkees kept A-Rod, he would have remained very productive for the life of his contract, but I doubt that he would have been "worth" what they would be paying him in year 7 or 8. Or, let me rephrase that--his on-field production would probably have fallen below his salary, but he would likely have paid for himself by setting milestones (leading to attendance, merchandise, etc.).

Now, the bestest case scenario might be if the Yankees offer A-Rod arbitration (which they will) and he for unknown reasons accepts. They would get him for one more contract year, then bye-bye as he hits his age 34 season.

Of course, he won't accept arbitration, but it's fun to think about.

2007-11-04 17:14:24
245.   monkeypants
243 I'd be interested to see those worldwide sales. When I am in europe I see plenty of interlocked NYs.
2007-11-04 17:20:56
246.   Hugh Jorgan
Maybe so, but you are forgetting Asia and its 3 billion football fans.
2007-11-04 17:21:56
247.   Hugh Jorgan
Oh, and Africa and its nearly 1 billion football fans...and I'm not talking about American football.
2007-11-04 17:32:52
248.   monkeypants
246 247 And its many, many baseball fans. in any case, it's not just about fans, or about which sport is more popular in the world. The Yankees (or at least their emblem) are a cultural icon in a way that Real Madrid is not. Soccer fans wear Real Madrid shirts. People who want to emulate American pop icons wear NY.
2007-11-04 17:45:04
249.   yankz
I would bet that the Yankees are bigger in Taiwan and Japan, and I think they'll be bigger in China within the decade.
2007-11-04 17:49:47
250.   yankz
This is interesting: Man U and the Yanks help market each other in different countries:

Show/Hide Comments 251-300
2007-11-04 18:01:17
251.   Hugh Jorgan
Baseball has very little prominence outside of Taiwan and Japan in Asia. Outside of a few small central American countries its not big at all. Football is the 800lb sporting gorilla in the room. Nothing else is even close. Funnily enough, here(in Sydney) you now actually see almost as many Boston hats as you do NY hats.
2007-11-04 18:12:29
252.   Simone
213 I refuse to debate the stupidity in that article. You continue to think like a fan. You actually believe that Boras is running the show. How you can believe this?

Unlike many people here, I have no problem with Alex going for the biggest payday that he can get because this will be his last big contract. I never castigated Boras or Alex for upstaging the World Series with the news of the opt out. This is business with a tinge of personal revenge added on. I can appreciate the great drama.

The Yankees now need to move on and figure out how best patch the hole left by Alex's departure and see what it will cost to enter the Johan Santana sweepstakes.

2007-11-04 18:12:45
253.   yankz
Hmm, according to Forbes, in terms of value, it's:

1. Man U (1.453 billion)
2. NYY (1.2 billion)
3. Real Madrid (1.036 billion)

But I don't think this includes YES Network money, I don't know what Man U's payroll is, and the Yankees are growing much more (17% over the last year compared to 6% for Man U). Also: "The Yankees new stadium, scheduled to open in 2009, will increase revenues by at least $50 million annually. " If the Yankees can continue to cut payroll, I think they'll pass them.

The thing we're debating about is brand management. The Yankees made $217 million from it last year, but unfortunately, no such data is available for the other 2.

Man U:

2007-11-04 18:13:32
254.   yankz
Boston is worth a little more than 1/2 what the Yankees are worth. I'm not worried.

2007-11-04 18:18:29
255.   yankz
Also, does soccer have revenue sharing?
2007-11-04 18:20:08
256.   OldYanksFan
It was hard to find numbers, and I image there are many vaiables, but here are some rough, ballpark numbers. In terms of dollars from tickets, concessions, merchandise and other incomes:
1) a regular season win is worth about 1 million
2) a post season win is worth about 2 million.

If these numbers are close, how much would ARod 'earn' to offset his salary?

2007-11-04 19:18:43
257.   Hugh Jorgan
That's all well and good as far as estimated worth is concerned. The statement I was arguing was that someone said the NY Yankees was the "most known" sports franchise in the world and this is simply untrue. Maybe 1/2 billion people have access to baseball telecasts, about 4.5 billion people worldwide watch football and ManU and Real are the two most popular club sides. All this aside though, the Brazilian national team probably outranks them all in terms of popularity.
2007-11-04 19:20:42
258.   Shaun P
253 FWIW, the Yanks do not own all of YES. IIRC, Goldman Sachs owns a large chunk, and whoever used to own the Nets before Rattner also has a piece (among a few other shareholders).

204 235 I think Gardner could be a very capable 5th OF this year, if the Yanks' roster has room for such a player. A true backup CF who's the primary pinch runner off the bench - and is even good to draw a walk in a pinch hit situation, if needed.

One small issue - he'd have to be added to the 40-man roster first.

204 I too have read bad reviews on Miranda. He's 25 next year, hasn't gotten to AAA yet, and hit only 16 home runs between high A and AA (.471 SLG). Not exactly what I'd want in a power hitting 1B prospect. (And he's another lefty!)

2007-11-04 19:43:28
259.   yankz
258 He did take two years off from baseball to defect. It's unfair to expect him to produce immediately.

257 Even if I grant that, and I would bet that more than half a billion people can watch baseball, your argument in 243 was that they are best known because they make more, which is questionable at best.

2007-11-04 20:52:13
260.   51cq24
232 what if steinbrenner dies or completely loses it in the next few years, and his sons either sell the team to someone who doesn't spend as wildly as george has or don't spend as wildly as george has? might we be screwed having a 40 year old making $30 million/year? we may yet have to spend money wisely. scary thought.

and who is this communist talking about the rest of the world realistically?

2007-11-07 11:43:42
261.   BiLLyBaLLeR
miguel cabrera and D-Willis for melky, cano and mid level pitching prospect karstens or wright or of that calibre, Maybe throw in another hitting prospect Austin Jackson or Tabata?

wang and kennedy with hitting prospect "Austin Jackson or Tabata?"
for… Johan Santana!

free gency

2 for the
bullpen and
andruw jones

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