Baseball Toaster Bronx Banter
Yankee Panky #35: What's Next?
2007-12-12 05:55
by Will Weiss
Note: The Bronx Banter blog has moved to

Christmas is approaching, and the Yankees have yet to buy fans their big offseason present. Because they haven’t cannonballed into the deep end and splashed everyone at the pool party, media types are circling like starving wolverines, bandying theories about why the Yankees will or won’t be successful in 2008.

The Detroit Tigers were the news, with their acquisition of Miguel Cabrera and Dontrelle Willis. Thanks to Steve Phillips and fellow Ithaca College alum Karl Ravech, I know the AL pennant will return to Motown in ‘08. Do the Tigers have a great lineup and a solid top three starting rotation? Sure. Does any of that guarantee even a wild-card? Ask the Pittsburgh Steelers how their guarantee worked out last week.

The Tigers included a top-flight prospect in Andrew Miller to get Cabrera and Willis. They were willing to mortgage some of their future to get two bona fide All-Stars. The Yankees weren’t willing to do the same, and they’re left Sans-tana. Depending on what you read and who you believe, the Yankees’ firm stance of conservatism is the correct approach. Newsday's Wally Matthews goes so far as to say it’s making them likeable. Do Yankee fans want the team to be likeable outside the bounds of New York and Boston?  

Maybe the key to that is Joba Chamberlain, ESPN Magazine’s newest cover boy and the winner of’s fan poll of the young star will have the greatest impact on the 2008 sporting landscape. With triple-digit power on his fast ball and a slider that dances like a wiffleball in a 20 mile-per-hour gust, it’s not a stretch. Maybe people just like his name. Look at all the fun we had with it in this space when he burst onto the scene in August.

I still maintain the young Cornhusker could make a bigger impact by remaining a devastating set-up man for Rivera and eventually inheriting that role. But the LaTroy Hawkins signing all but assures the Joba Plan involves pitching every fourth day. That is, unless Brian Cashman does a 180 on his public support of Kyle Farnsworth and deals the reliever. This is the same man who was 100 percent positive Bubba Crosby was the Yankees’ 2006 starting center fielder, until he signed Johnny Damon for that job six weeks before spring training.

* * *

Elsewhere, the Winter Meetings coverage was bland. I’ll admit, I lost interest myself when the Yankees announced they were withdrawing their entry in the Santana Sweepstakes.

The lefty’s situation is reminiscent of Alex Rodriguez’s four years ago, between the posturing, the interested teams involved, and the hype surrounding his next destination. Would anyone else be shocked if the Yankees, after months of lying in the weeds, landed him in a blockbuster deal right before Spring Training, as they did with A-Rod?

Until that happens, the faux deadlines of Hank Steinbrenner and “doors are still open for Santana” stories will dominate coverage. And since it wouldn't be a Yankees offseason without trade rumors, stories like the ones that surfaced regarding Hideki Matsui will continue. It's the cycle of the Yankees Hot Stove, which right now, is on low heat.

Next week … Mitchell Report fallout, and a friendly game of Where In the World Is Johan Santana?

Comments (100)
Show/Hide Comments 1-50
2007-12-12 06:17:35
1.   rbj
"This is the same man who was 100 percent positive Bubba Crosby was the Yankees' 2006 starting center fielder, until he signed Johnny Damon for that job six weeks before spring training"

I've got no problem with that. To me, it's ok to state that "A" is what we're going with, but still look around to see if there's an upgrade.

Same with Santana; it's ok to make a deal for him but I just don't want to rape the farm system for him. I'd rather have a team with a bunch of very good players than one with a couple of superstars and a bunch of pieces. Of course the Yankees won't be that bad, I just don't want a return to the 1980s. Ugh.

2007-12-12 06:41:06
2.   Andre
"Sans-tana" - nice ; )
2007-12-12 06:42:26
3.   JL25and3
Repeating a post from the last thread:

This will probably be in Alex's post today, but I have to mention it anyway. Warning to Mattpat: this article might give you an aneurysm.

My favorite line: "O'Connell said Pavano was concerned because he was only 11 days from accruing 10 years' service time in the majors and thus a full pension." Excuse me? By next year this guy will have stolen - er, "earned" - almost $50 million, and he's worried about his pension?

For that matter: if Pavano can pitch again, he'll get those 11 days. So he's concerned about accruing ML service time even if he can't pitch anymore. As if he hasn't already stolen enough service time, either...

2007-12-12 06:54:02
4.   rbj
3 F'ing release him. Or see if Tony Soprano is looking for some "work."
2007-12-12 06:56:07
5.   ms october
0 i think steve phillips still has his detroit hat from when he was a kid. maybe he is the faux gm there.

and a 180 on farns is would be nice - even a sharp right turn.

i wonder how much impact the media - especially someone like espn - has on influencing trades - their coverage of the potential santana trade with the yanks and red sox offers was their usual slant.

3 that carl is always one step ahead.

2007-12-12 06:58:27
6.   OldYanksFan
The winter meetings ending up in Sans tana (good one!) tells me the Yankees have a plan, and are thinking carefully about their youth, future and payroll. In some ways, this is the best news we could get. Having a financial advantage is nice. Having a 'Smarts' advantage is much better.

It's easy to outspend other teams. I personally would like out-planning and out-thinking to be the priority, and then use our money in the most efficient manner.

2007-12-12 07:02:47
7.   Alex Belth
Is anyone invested in what's going to shake down in this Mitchell Report? Howard Bryant has a long investigative piece on it today at
2007-12-12 07:11:07
8.   ms october
7 i read that piece - i believe the report is compromised on many levels.
oyf talked about the "hierarchy" or "pyramid" of who was being investigated the other day - and this aticle indicates that the owners are being given a pass - while the management and obviously the players are the main ones being held accountable
2007-12-12 07:15:59
9.   cercle
It would be nice if the Mitchell Report finally closed the door on the steroid era, but I think that's unlikely to happen.

It's non-tender day. Matt Wise is supposedly going to be NTed by the Brewers, if he hasn't been already. Worth taking a shot? Not sure what other relievers might hit the market.

2007-12-12 07:17:23
10.   williamnyy23
7 I have to admit that steroids has been a very minor issue for me, so I am looking forward to the report just so I don't have to keep hearing about it.

How about this game for a little pre-Mitchell fun. Let's all go on record with one surprise name that we think will appear in the report. My candidate is Jose Reyes.

2007-12-12 07:18:39
11.   williamnyy23
9 He'd be worth a spring invite. Not sure if a guaranteed deal would make sense without knowing exactly how the bullpen will shake out.
2007-12-12 07:20:32
12.   williamnyy23
If you really wanted to improve your team, I wonder if adding Barry Bonds would be more palatable now that so many names will be released by Mitchell. From the Yankees perspective, they could trade Matsui to the Giants for Sanchez and a prospect and then sign Bonds. Bonds would easily surpass Matsui's production and probably come at half the price.
2007-12-12 07:28:52
13.   ms october
12 i suspect the indictment came down when it did to make sure bonds does not play again - i wouldn't be surprised to see him in court most of the summer
2007-12-12 07:30:41
14.   ny2ca2dc
10 Good idea. Shea Hillenbrand & uh, I duno, Kyle Farnsworth and how about AJ Pierzinski. Wait, is this a douche bag list or PED list?
2007-12-12 07:38:09
15.   williamnyy23
13 Actually, a recent NYT articles stated the case wasn;t likely to be tried until after the 2007 season.
2007-12-12 07:38:28
16.   cercle
Latest I've heard is that Bonds' trial won't start until this time next year and that he'll probably sign with the A's.

Prior to A-Rod returning I was in favor of signing him as I thought it was the only conceivable way to replace that middle of the order production. The idea of replacing Matsui with him makes some sense, too. I doubt the Yankees will go there, but it's not a bad idea.

2007-12-12 07:45:22
17.   Rob Middletown CT
"I still maintain the young Cornhusker could make a bigger impact by remaining a devastating set-up man for Rivera and eventually inheriting that role."

It should be fun finding out, and arguing over where the dividing line between the value of ~75 innings of (spectacular) relief and ~200 innings of starting is. Obviously if he's spectacular as a starter, this is no debate (and I think we all hope that happens). But if he's merely "pretty good" well, then it will be interesting.

2007-12-12 07:49:40
18.   ms october
15 thanks - i didn't see that.
my speculation led me to think what i wrote - since someone (arod) would need only 8 more hrs than aaron to break bond's record if he never plays again - and i would think the powers that be don't want bonds adding any more hrs to his total

if matsui is traded i do wonder where that leaves things. it doesn't seem wise to bank on giambi being healthy the entire year. as someone (maybe yankz) pointed out yesterday - shelley's health issues seem pretty serious and no telling how and how long that will effect him.
so 1b/dh still seems very much a need.

2007-12-12 07:50:08
19.   williamnyy23
17 If the Yankees make Joba a reliever now, there is pretty much no going back. I'd rather give him a crack as a starter and then make a final decision based on how he performs. The bets case would be you have a #1 ace and the worst case would be you have dominant closer.
2007-12-12 07:52:06
20.   Raf
7 8 10 - Check out the response over @ River Ave Blues;
2007-12-12 08:02:13
21.   Alex Belth
My call would be Clemens (and, if it's Roger, then count Andy in too), and Pudge Rodriguez as the two big guys. Other Yankees? I fear there will be one guy I love who gets named. So let's go to my favorite Yankee--Bernie. How about minor guys like Brosius or Mike Stanton? I'm just guessing of course.
2007-12-12 08:10:19
22.   ms october
21 do you think there will mostly be names of guys who are no longer playing rather than active players?
2007-12-12 08:15:50
23.   Schteeve
7 I barely care. I'm mildly worried that Jeter will be implicated in a Viagra stockpiling offshoot of the investigation but that's about it.

As far as surprise names in the report, here are my picks with my estimated odds.

1) David Eckstein : (HGH) 4000-1
2) Darin Erstad: (Mainlining Grit and Hustle for the past 12 years) 1:1
3) Rocco Baldelli.

2007-12-12 08:22:23
24.   Orly Yarly NoWai
My bet: the number of current and former Yankees greatly exceeds the number of current and former Red Sox.
2007-12-12 08:37:16
25.   williamnyy23
21 With Clemens and Pettitte already tacitly linked, I don't know if I'd count those two guys as a surprise, especially if the report simply cites the same reference that was debunked a while back.

Bernie doesn't strike me as a candidate because his career path pretty much followed the pre-steroid era player. If he was using steroids, boy did they not work.

2007-12-12 08:39:11
26.   williamnyy23
22 Considering that Radomski left the Mets in 1995, and his cooperation is supposed to be the main source of names, I'd guess most on the list will be long-term vets or recently retired.
2007-12-12 09:02:08
27.   standuptriple
If the Mitchell report doesn't implicate (I doubt it will even suggest) that management turned a blind eye then I'll consider it a failure. When was the last thing Big Gov't got involved with that actually produced results? I would be shocked if there were more RedSox than Yankees though. I've been very pessimistic about the whole report since day one.
2007-12-12 09:09:41
28.   williamnyy23
27 The Bryant article already lists 4 or 5 ex-Red Sox who are known to be steroid users. From more recent teams, I think Oritz and Nixon candidates. I think only two names could rock Yankees Universe and Red Sox Nation...those would be Jeter and Ortiz.
2007-12-12 09:13:02
29.   tommyl
28 Jason Varitek, or...Dustin Pedroia would upset a lot of people ;)
2007-12-12 09:18:34
30.   NJYankee41
10 My surprise pick is Johan Santana. That would be a media frenzy.
2007-12-12 09:19:12
31.   larylegnd
I generally try not to get sucked into this kind of, I'll just say, stuff, but I could not help it this time.

I am a big Yankees fan, and I have to SERIOUSLY question the entire setup and contention of this column, Yanky Panky #35.

The very first sentence of this column, and I quote, "Christmas is approaching, and the Yankees have yet to buy fans their big offseason present."

Really??? Now I'm not saying nothing else will happen, but the Yankees HAVE spent $400 million so far this offseason, all on guys who had already hit the free agent market.

And speaking of those free agents, where on this year's list of free agents did Alex Rodriguez, Mariano Rivera, and Jorge Posada rank?

Had the Dodgers gone out and spent $400 million to sign Alex Rodriguez, Mariano Rivera, and Jorge Posada (and they could have, by the way. Again, all three were free agents into the signing period), would anybody be saying the Dodgers "have yet to buy fans their big offseason present."???

2007-12-12 09:25:47
32.   NJYankee41
31 I think it was more of a tongue-in-cheek type comment targeting the media's perspective on such things. I don't think anyone would debate that its not a great thing to have those three back, not to mention Pettitte too.
2007-12-12 09:34:51
33.   JL25and3
Cubs sign Fukudome, 4/48.
2007-12-12 09:35:33
34.   51cq24
24 what's your definition of "greatly"?

25 these wouldn't be a surprise; that wouldn't happen (would be a surprise)
bernie would be a huge shock and disappointment. but the biggest for yankee fans would be mo, i think.

2007-12-12 09:43:39
35.   rbj
My prediction for the Mitchell report:

"Most teams, especially the NYYankees had players using steroids & HGH. Only the plucky Red Sox had a system in place to guard against steroid users & thus maintain the purity of the game. When the RS thought certain players were using steroids (Damon, Clemens)they made sure to get rid of them."

Not that I think Sen. Mitchell would be biased, simply because he's associated with them.

2007-12-12 09:52:41
36.   NJYankee41
I don't believe George Mitchell will be bias in the overall sense, but I tend to believe if Ortiz showed up in the investigation Mitchell would want to surpress it to avoid questioning of the 2 world series they have won. It just seems that it would be far too damaging to the Red Sox for him to let a big name like Ortiz be implicated.
2007-12-12 10:05:44
37.   vockins
I could not care less who gets named in the Mitchell Report.

Bonds - whatever.
Jeter - whatever.
Eckstein - whatever.
Tris Speaker - whatever.

2007-12-12 10:06:24
38.   wsporter
O's moved Tejada to the 'Stros for what looks like not much. I wonder if the compensation or lack thereof may indicate that he's on Mitchell's fecal roster.
2007-12-12 10:11:52
39.   rbj
Any chance Yankees could get Pavano's name on Mitchell's report & thus boot him from the team without having to pay him his outrageous salary.

And I've been mostly out of the loop, but just heard somewhere that the Phillies have some interest in Moose. It is eastern PA, so he should be comfortable there, it'd be kinda nice to move him.

2007-12-12 10:13:52
40.   Schteeve
39 I saw that thing about Moose yesterday. Assuming everything stays the same, we've got three guys with innings caps in Kennedy, Joba, and Hughes, so I think having depth at SP is a good thing, and unless the return on Moose would be game changing, I wouldn't make the move.
2007-12-12 10:19:50
41.   vockins
39 OK, Pavano would be cool.
2007-12-12 10:31:43
42.   mehmattski
The Tejada trade lends evidence to OYF and others who think that Santana can be had in a 6 (mostly mediocre players) for 1 trade. Of course, Santana >>>> Tejada, but those trades do happen.
2007-12-12 10:35:25
43.   Rob Middletown CT
Well, the MN front office >> the Oriole front office, too. So no, I don't think a package of lots of mediocre prospects is going to land Santana.
2007-12-12 10:43:55
44.   yankz
I'd be pretty shattered if Jeter was named.
2007-12-12 10:44:28
45.   williamnyy23
42 I think your comment combined with 43 pretty much speaks to why the Twins wont settle for quantity over quality.

On the surface, it does look like the Astros didn't get much, but Tejada seems to be a player in decline. The fact that he has been rumored as a steroid user doesn't help much either. Scott is a very nice bat (and may actually out hit Tejada this year), but at 29 years old is only a stop gap player. The young pitchers range from a rejuvenated bullpen arm to back-end of the rotation prospects, so it really does look more like a salary dump as well as addition by subtraction.

2007-12-12 10:47:21
46.   Shaun P
43 I'd add in that the MN front office >> the Oriole front office >>>> the Houston front office.

The Astros have no good starting pitching after Oswalt, and yet they trade away their two best young pitchers in Albers and Patton? They are going to try to bludgeon opposing teams to death - if its possible to do that while having a lineup including Ausmus, Adam Everett, Kaz Matsui, and a pitcher every day. "Roy and Wandy, they better be dandy!"

Sheesh. Ed Wade still has no clue. He probably thinks they'll win the division.

2007-12-12 10:54:49
47.   rbj
40 I agree that with innings caps another starter will be needed. It's just that based on last year I honestly don't think Moose has anything left in the tank. I don't mean to be a hater, just that Cashman should look for a different 6th starter.
2007-12-12 10:55:03
48.   mehmattski
45 I agree with you, was just pointing out that 6-for-1 trades do exist under the right circumstances (salary dumps, terrible GMs like Ed Wade).

In the pre A-Rod re-signs days, I was very opposed to acquiring Tejada. Not just the steroid accusations (which I don't really care about except that Tejada's pre-2004 production may have been inflated), I was very dissuaded by Tejada's apparent lack of interest when playing the Yankees last year. I frequently saw him failing to run out pop-ups or weak grounders... and his fielding was just as lazy. Sure, it sucks to play for a loser like the Orioles, but I'd rather have players with good work ethics.

I have a feeling the Astros just got a giant lemon.

2007-12-12 11:04:15
49.   williamnyy23
46 I'm no so sure I agree with you. Albers and Patton are at best 5th starter types. Luke Scott wasn't going to play everyday and Costanzo, who was just acquired in the Lidge deal, is also a second-tier prospect at best. So, if Tejada can come close to his 2004-2006 performance, and stay in good enough shape to play defense at SS or 3B, the deal might be worth it.

From the Orioles side, while they aren't really getting much more than stop gaps and end of roster filler, it is kind of addition by subtraction as well as a salary dump. Coming off a bad season and steroid implications, I am not sure that there would have been a bigger market for Tejada. You can question why the Orioles didn't deal Tejada sooner, but I don't think they could have gotten much more now.

2007-12-12 11:13:11
50.   MetsSox
The Tigers are not the favorites in 2008. Come on now, people we all know its the Red Sox. Can u say 3 titles in 5 years? Hell yea, I can with or without Santana.
Show/Hide Comments 51-100
2007-12-12 11:31:29
51.   pistolpete
50 Hysterical!
2007-12-12 11:34:28
52.   Shaun P
49 All that may be true, but the odds are significantly greater that one of Albers, Patton, or Costanzo will be on the next contending Orioles team, whereas the odds of Tejada having been on the next contending Orioles team have got to be near zero.

I don't think Tejada was going to get back to his '04-'06 production in Baltimore, and while Albers and Patton may not seem like much, as they say with pitchers, youneverknow.

In any case, I do think Ed Wade (and Drayton McClane) think they just won the Astros the division with this deal, and I'm not convinced of that at all.

2007-12-12 11:57:23
53.   JL25and3
36 I think people underestimate George Mitchell's basic decency. I would be astonshed if he didn't just let the chips fall where they may.
2007-12-12 12:05:45
54.   MetsSox
51 I don't really see what is so funny.
2007-12-12 12:17:45
55.   yankz
Your user name is MetsSox. You are the joke.
2007-12-12 12:19:30
56.   JL25and3
Troll, thy name is MetsSox. But we're not really all that much fun to troll, especially not that ineptly.
2007-12-12 12:19:30
57.   OldYanksFan
42 43 Gentlemen -
For one, I suggested swapping our #3 prospect for our #1 prospect, and suggested making up that difference with 2nd tier quality, but not our top 5 propects (they are alreay getting #3). It's funny that when we speak of Melancon, Betances and some of the others, we are excited. But when we talk of sending them to Minn, they become dregs.

I will say again that the Sox only offered only ONE of their 2nd or 3rd 'prospects', either Lester of Ellsbury. It just seems to me we should be able to put together an IPK package that is better then a Sox package.

Minn. was 29th of 30 in HRs. Shelly would have no value to them? As a little bonus? Sanchez? Somebody? Anybody but Phil?

2007-12-12 12:31:03
58.   Simone
53 I'd be shocked if Mitchall called out the ownership for turning a blind eye in any major way. Like Selig originally, Mitchell is part o ownership which is why he was given the job so that he would protect their backs.
2007-12-12 12:31:14
59.   Rob Middletown CT
Shelley Duncan has no trade value. He's not a prospect, and he just had a major medical issue and will not be ready for spring training.

I think there might be an IPK-based package that would interest the Twins, but if MN knows what it's doing (and generally speaking they do), they will know they need hitting more than they need pitching. Thus, for the Twins, Elsbury & Lowrie are more attractive than similiarly talented pitchers.

A Yankee package will be built around pitchers, and will thus have to overpay (hence Hughes). It sucks, but that's how I see it. Boston is simply in a better position to make the trade.

2007-12-12 12:35:03
60.   ny2ca2dc
57 You're really undervaluing/ignoring Lowrie.
2007-12-12 12:51:39
61.   Bama Yankee
57 I'm with you on keeping Hughes. The other day I suggested that we try a different approach to get Santana:

Cano, Melky, Kennedy, Farnsworth & prospect(s)
Santana and Nathan

We would probably have to absorb some of Farnsworth's worth (addition by subtraction and he could close for them with his 100 mph heater). I'd put Betemit at 2B (or sign Eckstein) and sign Rowand to play CF.

When I posted this the other day, Mattpat and William were against it. What say you, OYF?

2007-12-12 12:52:38
62.   RZG
58 Wasn't Mitchell involved with or even the leader of Bud's "Blue Ribbon" Committee to show how much Baseball was in trouble financially back in the early 2000's?

Mitchell was a shill for Selig then, what's changed since?

I suppose I should wait to see the final product he'll present Thursday but his conflicts of interest regarding his ties to baseball and Disney makes me very skeptical.

2007-12-12 12:58:17
63.   Shaun P
53 I think Mitchell will let the chips fall where they may, but I'd prefer not to have to rely on his basic decency. No offense to Senator Mitchell, I would say that about anyone in his position with such a blatant conflict of interest.

I also tend to agree with Simone in 58 that there's no way ownership gets taken to task. Mitchell is, after all, Selig's friend, and Bud is no dummy. If it does anything at all, the Mitchell Report is going to give the owners plausible deniablility at the very least.

I also think the whole investigation has been a tremendous waste of time and resources. I haven't seen a total price tag, but I remember earlier in the year reports being that the investigation had cost in excess of $15M. That money would have been far better spent on education and research. Of course, education and research wouldn't have given names, and that's likely what this entire exercise has been about.

2007-12-12 13:00:15
64.   MetsSox
55 And you wonder why everyone hates yankee fans???
2007-12-12 13:04:13
65.   seattleyank
According to, the Giants have signed Aaron Rowand to a 5-year deal.

I wonder if that makes a Matsui trade more or less likely. On the one hand, that's one less open outfield spot in SF. On the other, if the Giants are dumb enough to give Rowand five years, maybe Lincecum or Cain really could be had for a Matsui package.

2007-12-12 13:04:56
66.   ny2ca2dc
61 No trading Cano. No!

I don't want to trade Hughes, but it seemed like if they wanted to make a deal, they should remove Melky from the package. He's probably not adding enough value for the Twins, while he is still pretty useful for the Yanks. If they wouldn't take Hughes, Melky, and Horne (wanted Horne and Jackson), then Hughes, Jackson, and Horne would probably get it done. I would go Jackson, Kennedy, Horne, +, maybe that would be a better starting point than Hughes, Melky +. Oh well, F it.

2007-12-12 13:09:00
67.   yankz
Nathan has one year left before FA I'm pretty sure, and there's not a shot in hell he re-signs to set up Mo for a couple more years. No way do I trade Cano in that deal.
2007-12-12 13:15:55
68.   JL25and3
62 , 63 I should have been clearer. I agree, Mitchell might well shift the blame away from the owners. I just don't think he'll shy away from naming Red Sox players.
2007-12-12 13:18:45
69.   Shaun P
63 Allow me to correct that. According to Jayson Stark, MLB spent $60M on the Mitchell investigation. That is a Pavano-level waste.

I'd love to see the breakdown of that bill. I imagine some folks at DLA Piper are very happy right now.

2007-12-12 13:28:32
70.   OldYanksFan
61 "Cano, Melky, Kennedy, Farnsworth & prospect(s) for Santana and Nathan".
Out of the Box, yes! A good trade, I don't think so. First, I don't think Farns is much of an enticement. 2nd, Santana, + replace Cano and Melky is $45m/yr easy. 3rd, short of ARod, Cano will be our best hitter soon, and for years to come. 3rd, we are pitching rich, but position players short. I think Cano is too valuable. We don't need pitching that badly.

I don't want Santana that much. I'm against the trade in general, ESPECIALLY if it includes Phil.

1) "Hughes, Jackson, and Horne"
2) "Jackson, Kennedy, Horne, +"

#1 is 3 of our top 6, including our #1. Doesn't that almost define depleting the Farm?
#2 Ain't much better (or less worse) depending on who the "+" is. Tabata?

Remember that Santana will cost us $25m/yr for 6 years. As a FA... fine. But this trade... the price is too steep. I don't think we need him as much as we are afraid the Sox will get him.

I say "NO!" and pray a bit.

And in General, Jetes for 4 yrs, Posada for 3, Mo for 4 and ARod until Armegedeon. We are already in for 'overpaid, aging vets'. We must be careful about going any further in that direction. We must stay young, even if we give up a year or 2 of the PS.

2007-12-12 13:34:10
71.   Rob Middletown CT
You do not trade Robinson Cano. Period. Full stop. Step away from the crack pipe.

I'm for keeping Hughes, but I acknowledge I could be wrong. The pro-trade group has valid points. I've yet to see a reasonable explanation of why trading Cano makes even the slightest bit of sense.

2007-12-12 14:08:32
72.   vockins
I want to join the pile on about trading Cano. That is looney tunes.

Maybe for Albert Pujols.

2007-12-12 14:12:50
73.   MetsSox
Farnsworth as trade bait? Yea, I don't think so. Farnsworth is terrible and if the Skanks are relying on him to be their set up man then HAH! He's no Okajima...that's for sure. The Yanks bullpen is awful...u should keep Joba "Bugs" Chamberlain in the set up spot or else Giradi will pull a Toree and overuse everyone.
Santana would actually give the Skanks a chance to compete with the Sox...but let's be real hear as long as A-Rod's here, then there will be no more titles in da bronx. So sad, so so sad :-(
2007-12-12 14:24:00
74.   Bama Yankee
70 Thanks for the response. You have been asking for something "out of the box" to get Santana and that was my best shot. I didn't think many people would like it, but I do appreciate you giving it some thought and even a little analysis (same goes for yankz in 67 ).

71 Crack pipe? Really? I've never even smoked a cigarette.
Look, I love Cano but if I could get the best pitcher in the league and keep the best pitching prospect in the league by just giving up Cano and Melky... I would do it. In the playoffs, having Santana and Hughes in the rotation for the next five years could be a difference maker. Will having Cano at second and Hughes in the rotation be a difference maker? I hope so, but I'm not so sure. Everyone says that great pitching beats great hitting. So my thought was that we might try trading one of our great hitters for a great pitcher and maybe that would improve our chances in the postseason. Maybe that's not a reasonable explanation, but I don't think that it is "crack pipe-ish".

2007-12-12 14:29:01
75.   Bama Yankee
72 First, I'm a crack pipe smoker, now I'm looney tunes... "What's up, Voc?" ;-)

vockins, would you trade Cano for Santana, straight up?

2007-12-12 14:34:45
76.   Shaun P
74 Bama, I think your explanation is beyond reasonable - as applied to 2008. But what happens in, say, 2010? The Yanks are soon (by 2010 for sure) going to desperately need more outstanding young hitters. The problem is, as OYF says in 70 , they only have one - Cano. Thus, they have got to keep him, even if it means passing Santana by.

73 I miss ric and debris (our "usual" Sox "trolls"). They at least added something useful to the conversation when they spoke. You do not, so, good bye.

2007-12-12 14:40:20
77.   underdog
76 Oh come on, Shaun, let's "be real hear!"


I don't know what to make of the Giants long deal for Aaron Rowand, except that Brian Sabean is desperate/and/or doesn't learn from past mistakes. Though I won't feel cocky about the fact that they may have Dave Roberts in LF given my team may have Juan Pierre in LF(!) but at least I have hope Joe Torre may gag at that idea as well.

2007-12-12 14:52:00
78.   Bama Yankee
76 Fair enough. First, let me say that I am not adamant about trading Cano, it was just my "out of the box" idea that OYF had asked for. Second, for arguments sake, if our rotation had Santana, Wang, Hughes and Joba could we not trade some of our blue-chip pitching prospects for a few guys to replace Cano's bat and possibly some of our other aging hitters? This is something we might have to do anyway, since we are light in position prospect department.

Ultimately, I don't think Cashman would trade Cano anyway. So, this whole discussion, while fun (in a looney tunes sorta way) is probably mute/moot... ;-)

2007-12-12 15:09:20
79.   ms october
77 yes, let's be real hear

78 hi bama - i'll be happy to get out the already crappy new england weather at the end of next week for a brief return to bama.
good effort at thinking out of the box - and i agree with your sentiment about a santana, wang, hughes, and joba rotation.
but my hesitance about parting with cano for almost anyone except pujols or the like is as has been stated, he is the only good young bat, also he is the only good infielder, and probably the only above average fileder of any position.

it has been alluded to before, but the yanks and twins may not be good trade partners because of the twins higher need for position players than pitchers.
i hope cashman and oppenheimer continue to grow the farm by focusing some more on the position player side to balance out players for the yanks, as well as to make us a more versatile trading partner

2007-12-12 15:17:37
80.   Bama Yankee
79 You should have been down here this week. We have had temps in the mid 70's. Yesterday was a Mussina day... it almost hit 80! (sorry Moose, but that YES radar gun can only lie so much) ;-)
Have a safe trip, ms october.
2007-12-12 15:32:02
81.   weeping for brunnhilde
79 Wait, what?

Is Alex not a good infielder, are are you talking about prospects?

2007-12-12 15:56:20
82.   ms october
80 thanks - i hope it is still warm when i get there

81 sorry - that was not well thought out/written- though alex is a good fielder, he is not really well above average according to most metrics, whereas some ratings put cano among the top 2b - plus it seems a good guess that within a couple of years alex will start declining more and possibly need to move

2007-12-12 16:23:51
83.   tommyl
Apparently the Dodgers have signed and invited Tanyon Sturtze to spring training. Think Paul Quantril is still around? They can have the all crappy veteran bullpen.
2007-12-12 17:03:13
84.   monkeypants
83 Saw that. This is a good time to reflect on all of the needless (in my opinion) controversy following the playoffs, and on the (hopefully) new direction next tear.
2007-12-12 17:07:16
85.   tommyl
84 Or wait for the major free agent signing of the offseason. Prediction: Miguel Cairo to the Dodgers!
2007-12-12 17:45:49
86.   SF Yanks
I have a question that I should have asked earlier when everyone was around. But, as far as excitement goes when the season begins, are people more excited for the '08 season than for previous seasons or is the excitement level about the same?

The reason I ask is while my excitement level is usually at 100 (scale of 1 to 100) on opening day, this year it's going to be about 120. I'm usually beyond amped and ready to go but this next year has that special something to it... Joba Ian Hughes is his name.

2007-12-12 18:03:29
87.   RIYank
Did everyone see this at LoHud?

Andy Pettitte, on whether the Yankees need to get Santana:

"I guess there has been a lot of speculation that we need a true power arm, ace or whatever. I disagree with that," he said. "I think Wang is an absolute stud. I think he is an ace. I understand he struggled in the postseason but that's going to happen. I've struggled in the postseason before then come back and pitched extremely well. … To say we need (Santana) to be successful, that's hard for me to say."


2007-12-12 18:03:58
88.   tommyl
86 More excited than I've been in years. Though I might have said that last year too...
2007-12-12 18:08:30
89.   tommyl
87 Yup. I kinda love the Wanger. Yeah he had two bad games in the playoffs, but so have many other great pitchers (ahem...Clemens, Johnson, Cone, Pettitte).
2007-12-12 18:23:29
90.   vockins
75 If you're getting a year of Santana, then having to negotiate what's almost certainly going to be the longest and most expensive contract for a pitcher in MLB history, and the present pitching staff being what it is now, no.
2007-12-12 18:46:04
91.   monkeypants
85 One can only hope...
2007-12-12 21:02:42
92.   weeping for brunnhilde
87 Andy's a golden god and Chien-Ming's a stud.

That's exactly right.

2007-12-12 21:08:52
93.   weeping for brunnhilde
82 Wow, that's crazy! All mediocre fielders should be so good.

Even this last season? I know he's had weird head-case struggles at third in the past, but last season he seemed extremely steady and very, very clutch. He seems to make a lot of those tough short-hops (great reflexes), is pretty damned good coming down the line and he's got that arm.

I was actually just as impressed by his fielding as by his bat last season.

Meanwhile, Robby's the one who, despite the fact that he makes a lot of unbelievable plays up the middle and has a great pivot on dp's, always makes me nervous when the money's on the table. I just don't entirely trust him.

Plus, for Christ's sake, I really really really wish Abreu would learn to call him off.

Those over-the-shoulder basket catches drive me to distraction

2007-12-12 21:59:21
94.   yankz
mehmattski, I can't comment over at WasWatching, but Varitek spent two years in the Mariners' system before being traded to the Sox.
2007-12-12 22:00:46
95.   Bruce Markusen
Just saw the list of players who were non-tendered. There are a few names that might interest the Yankees.

Two relievers struck me eye: Akinori Otsuka (in whom the Yankees have expressed interest in the past) and Kiko Calero.

If you're looking for bench strength, there's Willie Harris, who had a good first half for the Braves before fading.

In terms of right-handed hitters, there are Jason Lane (who's a project coming off a miserable two seasons), Morgan Ensberg (if only the Yankees still needed a third baseman), and Kevin Mench.

Also, Mark Prior was non-tendered. Would you take a chance on him? If he'd take a one-year contract with lots of incentives, I'd be tempted.

Other players who wouldn't interest the Yankees, but are nonetheless intriguing are Adam Everett (the new Mark Belanger), Johnny Estrada (the Mets career didn't last long), and Miguel Olivo.

2007-12-13 04:23:53
96.   Levy2020
95 And what about all those minor leaguers that I thought Cashman was trying smuggle past Rule V? Now what was the point of putting them on the roster?
2007-12-13 05:33:01
97.   Rob Middletown CT
Bama Yankee,

I'm sorry for the "crack pipe" comment... but I really do think that the idea of trading Robinson Cano for Santana is nutty. There are maybe 5 guys in the game I'd trade him for, straight up, and they're all position players. He's 25, and arguably the best 2B in the AL.

The Yankees are an old team. Cano and Melky are the only young position players. The Yanks need more of that, not less.

I'd rather trade Hughes+ than Cano. And I don't want to trade Hughes.

2007-12-13 05:36:16
98.   ChuckM
The Yankees did not offer deals to RHPs T.J. Beam, Matt DeSalvo and Darrell Rasner.

Thanks, Pavano. Douche.

2007-12-13 05:41:04
99.   Yankee Fan In Boston

i would love to comment on this, but it pretty much speaks for itself.

2007-12-13 07:11:17
100.   Raf
95 I'd take a chance on Prior and Otsuka.

94 Yeah, he came over in the Slocumb heist...

98 They were spare parts, so I can't find much fault with letting them go. Of course, all 3 probably have a better chance of contributing this season than Pavano...

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