View Full Version : Now Wilkerson makes sense
longtimeyankeefan
12-24-05, 06:56 AM
Brad Wilkerson's name was thrown around by many during our question for Bubba's replacement in CF. To me, he now makes total sense in our quest for bench strength.
Wilkerson could back up all three OF positions and play 1B, giving Torre great flexibility off the bench. With the pop he has, he would be a good bat off the bench.
The Rangers, even after trading Sledge to SD, will have five quality OFers on their roster (Delucci, Nix, Matthews, Wilkerson & Mench). However, they have absolutely no one anyone has heard of in their rotation - Eaton's acquisition will change that dynamic. Still, they continue to work on trying to convince Kevin Millwood to pitch in the Texas heat.
Could we put together a quality package that would pry Wilkerson away from Texas?
Yankees1962
12-24-05, 07:02 AM
Brad Wilkerson's name was thrown around by many during our question for Bubba's replacement in CF. To me, he now makes total sense in our quest for bench strength.
Wilkerson could back up all three OF positions and play 1B, giving Torre great flexibility off the bench. With the pop he has, he would be a good bat off the bench.
The Rangers, even after trading Sledge to SD, will have five quality OFers on their roster (Delucci, Nix, Matthews, Wilkerson & Mench). However, they have absolutely no one anyone has heard of in their rotation - Eaton's acquisition will change that dynamic. Still, they continue to work on trying to convince Kevin Millwood to pitch in the Texas heat.
Could we put together a quality package that would pry Wilkerson away from Texas?
To answer your question, no! Also, Texas has to know that Nix can't hit a lick and Delucci is on the downslide while Matthews is okay, but going into a free agent year. I just don't see the Yankees trading any of their pitchers until late March. Their starting pitching is a question mark and until they know for sure what they have, I don't see them messing with it until they need to do so.
Brad Wilkerson's name was thrown around by many during our question for Bubba's replacement in CF. To me, he now makes total sense in our quest for bench strength.
Wilkerson could back up all three OF positions and play 1B, giving Torre great flexibility off the bench. With the pop he has, he would be a good bat off the bench.
The Rangers, even after trading Sledge to SD, will have five quality OFers on their roster (Delucci, Nix, Matthews, Wilkerson & Mench). However, they have absolutely no one anyone has heard of in their rotation - Eaton's acquisition will change that dynamic. Still, they continue to work on trying to convince Kevin Millwood to pitch in the Texas heat.
Could we put together a quality package that would pry Wilkerson away from Texas?
Wilkerson would be a great addition. He could rotate as you said and still play full time.
The Yankees could trade any combination of Pavano, Sturtze, Proctor, Henn to get him.
JeterRodriguezSheff
12-24-05, 08:40 AM
Wilkerson would be a great addition. He could rotate as you said and still play full time.
The Yankees could trade any combination of Pavano, Sturtze, Proctor, Henn to get him.
Agreed it lets Sheff Dh, WIlkerson could play right field and essentially you replace bernies Horrible bat with Wilkerson and his great OBP
I know there are a lot of Wilkerson lovers here, but I believe Kevin Thompson could potentially do the same thing.
Since 2002, his minor league career OBP is .376. He also gives you a lot more speed and is a very good defender. He is much cheaper and wouldn't cost the Yankees anything.
JeterRodriguezSheff
12-24-05, 09:45 AM
I know there are a lot of Wilkerson lovers here, but I believe Kevin Thompson could potentially do the same thing.
Since 2002, his minor league career OBP is .376. He also gives you a lot more speed and is a very good defender. He is much cheaper and wouldn't cost the Yankees anything.
Wilkerson outside of the Nats park and in Yankee stadium would have a lot more power. Also Thompson likely wont put up the same numbers in the Majors.
panicfan
12-24-05, 03:59 PM
Do you guys seriously think offense is that big a deal at this point?
Whoever they use, as long as he can catch and throw the ball will be good enough.
Wilkerson outside of the Nats park and in Yankee stadium would have a lot more power. Also Thompson likely wont put up the same numbers in the Majors.
AMYanks
12-24-05, 04:01 PM
Rangers will probably be asking too much for him.
JeffWeaverFan
12-24-05, 04:02 PM
I would love to get Wilkerson, but it would take an arm and a leg to get him. Pavano + cash would definitely not work. My guess is the package would start with Wang and end with Hughes and I am not willing to do that.
JavyVazquezIsSick
12-24-05, 04:03 PM
Pavano + Cash isn't worth Wilkerson anyway...
The FUTURE
12-24-05, 04:23 PM
Texas aint giving up WIlkerson...He's just the guy they wanted. We could get Nix or Mathews if we wanted them...but we prob. dont want them.
JeffWeaverFan
12-24-05, 04:24 PM
Pavano + Cash isn't worth Wilkerson anyway...
A league average pitcher isn't worth Wilkerson?
JeterRodriguezSheff
12-24-05, 04:34 PM
Do you guys seriously think offense is that big a deal at this point?
Whoever they use, as long as he can catch and throw the ball will be good enough.
Well I like to have as little as blackholes as possible, if were Bernie or thompson were an average hitter id be ok but they are really bad hitters. Wilkerson would also provide better defense than both options.
JeterRodriguezSheff
12-24-05, 04:35 PM
A league average pitcher isn't worth Wilkerson?
For some reason people have got into their heads that Pavano's 2005 was an abberation, when really his 2004 was the abberation and 2005 was the norm for him. Dont ask me why, because I have no clue.
For some reason people have got into their heads that Pavano's 2005 was an abberation, when really his 2004 was the abberation and 2005 was the norm for him. Dont ask me why, because I have no clue.
This is true and its not only here. On the Yes boards its the same thing. Either way the guy is average at best and injury prone.
For some reason people have got into their heads that Pavano's 2005 was an abberation, when really his 2004 was the abberation and 2005 was the norm for him. Dont ask me why, because I have no clue.
Yet you know enough to make a brash assumption based on 100 innings he pitched through injury.
JeterRodriguezSheff
12-24-05, 04:44 PM
Yet you know enough to make a brash assumption based on 100 innings he pitched through injury.
Nope im going by his whole injury plagued and mediocre when healthy career
Nope im going by his whole injury plagued and mediocre when healthy career
People will never learn.
JeffWeaverFan
12-24-05, 04:47 PM
Yet you know enough to make a brash assumption based on 100 innings he pitched through injury.
He's actually using Pavano's entire career to make his assumption. By the way, it seems like he wasn't injured when he was pitching. As soon as his shoulder got sore, he decided to sit out the rest of the year.
JavyVazquezIsSick
12-24-05, 04:48 PM
A league average pitcher isn't worth Wilkerson?
No, but I believe Pavano's perception as a pitcher around the league is higher than his actual worth...
Nope im going by his whole injury plagued and mediocre when healthy career
It's fine if you note that he has been inconsistent, and for the most part, mediocre in his career (98, 84, 151, 73, 79, 94, 137, 94 ERA+), but you can't say based on 100 innings last year that he has completely regressed.
In fact, he's only pitched two seasons of 140+ innings, and had 94 and 137 ERA+ those years, so to make a decision based on 100 innings is even more short-sighted.
JeffWeaverFan
12-24-05, 04:49 PM
People will never learn.
Maybe they will next year. Of course, if he gets hurt again next year, maybe people will use that as an excuse...
JeffWeaverFan
12-24-05, 04:50 PM
It's fine if you note that he has been inconsistent, and for the most part, mediocre in his career (98, 84, 151, 73, 79, 94, 137, 94 ERA+), but you can't say based on 100 innings last year that he has completely regressed.
In fact, he's only pitched two seasons of 140+ innings, and had 94 and 137 ERA+ those years, so to make a decision based on 100 innings is even more short-sighted.
It is short-sighted to make a decision that he is a good pitcher based on his 1 good season. A season that he was pitching in the NL, in a great pitchers park, and a season in which he was very lucky.
He's been an injury prone pitcher that has sat out for extended periods of time with minor injuries and when he has pitched, he has pitched like a league average pitcher. His K/9 and G/F ratio also indicates that he is a league average pitcher.
It is short-sighted to make a decision that he is a good pitcher based on his 1 good season. A season that he was pitching in the NL, in a great pitchers park, and a season in which he was very lucky.
He's been an injury prone pitcher that has sat out for extended periods of time with minor injuries and when he has pitched, he has pitched like a league average pitcher. His K/9 and G/F ratio also indicates that he is a league average pitcher.
I'm only refuting the statement that he is worse than a league-average pitcher. In fact, he's been a completely average pitcher throughout his career (100 ERA+).
shotgun_sam
12-24-05, 08:45 PM
Maybe they will next year. Of course, if he gets hurt again next year, maybe people will use that as an excuse...
Or if he pitches ineffectively again, maybe we'll just say he was hurt.
Or maybe he'll say he was hurt.
Do you guys seriously think offense is that big a deal at this point?
Whoever they use, as long as he can catch and throw the ball will be good enough.
We have to trade pitchers. Why would we not try to acquire the best player we can (offense and defense included)? Unless we win every single game, there will be times when more runs can help us.
nycdoc999
12-24-05, 10:59 PM
THe problem is, Wilkerson is attractive to the Red Sox as well, who could use him as a low-cost solution in CF.
If the Sox sign Millwood, they create an even bigger need for pitching in Texas. Now that would be fine for the Yankees if Texas liked Pavano more than say, Matt Clement - but I bet they don't.
Clement has no history of injury, and is at least as good as Pavano when healthy over his career, Pavano's fluke 2004 season notwithstanding.
So Wilkerson for Clement + mid-level prospect is more likely than Wilkerson for Pavano + Henn or Proctor or Sturtze or whomever else.
It gets worse if Bostom offers Arroyo, who is a low cost solution for Texas. If that happens, the Yanks would have to counter with someone like Chacon + prospects for Wilkerson, which I don't think the Yanks want to do. Not sure that would be enough to get it done from the Ranger's standpoint anyway. Pavano has at least had one season where he's won games on a consistent basis - you can't say the same for Chacon, and even though he pitched really well for us last year and we all like him as a pitcher BETTER than Pavano going forward, he doesn't have that same "reputation", for lack of a better word.
Bottom line - Wilkerson is gonna be tough to get. Sox may view him as a fallback option for Crisp (they don't want to deal Marte) or Jeremy Reed (Seattle may not be interested in obtaining Clement or Arroyo now that they have Washburn), and they have better trade chips than the Yanks....
yankeeman61
12-26-05, 09:35 AM
Unless somebody knocks their socks off with an offer for Wilkerson I don't see Texas trading him. I've heard in several places about Mench being the odd man out for pitching trade bait. That makes a lot more sense for Texas, as Wilkerson is a better all around player than Mench. There's a reason why Texas went out to get him: he is an upgrade over what they have so without having yet to play a single inning for them, he would cost too much overall to pry him away.
StatenIslandYankee
12-26-05, 02:06 PM
I think they will ask for too much.
Iknowcool
12-26-05, 03:25 PM
Pavano/Wright in exchange for Laynce Nix.
flymick24
12-26-05, 04:29 PM
Pavano/Wright in exchange for Laynce Nix.
:barf:
i don't understand everyone's fascination with texas OFers. besides wilkerson, none of them have shown anything that makes them worth trading for.
Spaceboy88
12-27-05, 01:36 PM
Unless you're upgrading pitching, there's no reason right now to dump any of our pitchers. Sheffield's defense isn't hurting us in RF and there are too many question marks with the pitching staff to be trading anything away.
Spaceboy88
12-27-05, 01:37 PM
Pavano/Wright in exchange for Laynce Nix.
I'd rather have Pavano and Wright bat than Nix!
MTYankee23
12-27-05, 01:41 PM
Unless you're upgrading pitching, there's no reason right now to dump any of our pitchers. Sheffield's defense isn't hurting us in RF and there are too many question marks with the pitching staff to be trading anything away.
I don't like Nix at all, and right now the likelihood is that after the Millwood signing the Rangers won't go after high priced pitchers. So a Pavano trade would be out of the question.
That said, this is dangerous thinking. We have a lot of question marks with our pitching staff, but this is not a reason to hang on to a question mark that can be used to improve other areas of our team by trading for a non-question mark in another area.
Sheffield is ideally suited at this point in his career for DH duty, and sparse outfield work. This does 2 things, improves Sheffield's offense, and also improves our pitching by improving the outfield defense.
Spaceboy88
12-27-05, 01:43 PM
Sheffield is ideally suited at this point in his career for DH duty, and sparse outfield work. This does 2 things, improves Sheffield's offense, and also improves our pitching by improving the outfield defense.
I agree with you, but why should we trade our pitchers away when we have a fully capable backup in Bubba Crosby or Bernie Williams that can take RF duties, and allow us to keep our current pitchers?
MTYankee23
12-27-05, 01:48 PM
I agree with you, but why should we trade our pitchers away when we have a fully capable backup in Bubba Crosby or Bernie Williams that can take RF duties, and allow us to keep our current pitchers?
Bernie absolutely cannot play the OF for any extended period of time anymore. He doesn't have the range for LF or CF in Yankee Stadium, and he doesn't have the arm for RF.
While Bubba is a capable defensive option in RF. His offense would be even more of a liability in RF than it was in CF, where he wasn't a viable starting option either.
As always it depends on the value other teams place on our pitchers. At the same time, Boston has 3 starting pitchers that teams may potentially value more than Pavano, and have more holes to fill than us at this time.
JeffWeaverFan
12-27-05, 01:50 PM
Pavano/Wright in exchange for Laynce Nix.
Nix is horrible. He had an OBP last year of .267.
Spaceboy88
12-27-05, 01:56 PM
Bernie absolutely cannot play the OF for any extended period of time anymore. He doesn't have the range for LF or CF in Yankee Stadium, and he doesn't have the arm for RF.
While Bubba is a capable defensive option in RF. His offense would be even more of a liability in RF than it was in CF, where he wasn't a viable starting option either.
As always it depends on the value other teams place on our pitchers. At the same time, Boston has 3 starting pitchers that teams may potentially value more than Pavano, and have more holes to fill than us at this time.
I'm certainly not suggesting that we play Bernie or Bubba for an extended stint in the RF, but those two, mostly Bubba, could fill in should the need arise. All I'm trying to say is that there's no need for Wilkerson now when we already have Giambi/Bernie who can DH. I'm more worried about the starting rotation to start thinking about throwing an albeit questionable Pavano out the door for a non-starting pitcher.
ShaneTravis
12-27-05, 01:59 PM
Nix is horrible. He had an OBP last year of .267.
He has an aversion to getting on base. He is young but so far he is a platoon player.
No way should anything of value (pitching) should be sent to Texas for any of their outfielders not named Wilkerson.
MTYankee23
12-27-05, 02:06 PM
I'm certainly not suggesting that we play Bernie or Bubba for an extended stint in the RF, but those two, mostly Bubba, could fill in should the need arise. All I'm trying to say is that there's no need for Wilkerson now when we already have Giambi/Bernie who can DH. I'm more worried about the starting rotation to start thinking about throwing an albeit questionable Pavano out the door for a non-starting pitcher.
If Bubba and Bernie aren't playing RF for an extended stint, and like I said, Bernie isn't playing there at all. That means Sheffield is. Putting together a team is all about maximizing value. A player like Wilkerson who can put up an .800+ OPS, while effectively rotating between 1B, RF, DH, and sometimes LF and CF and is making a reasonable salary is more valuable to us (or almost any team for that matter) than a pitcher who is grossly overpaid for his ability and likely will in no way solve our pitching problems for next year whether he pitches for us or not.
While Pavano's value isn't at its alltime high (sadly that was when we bought him) it isn't at its all time low...yet. His '04 season is still probably fresh in the minds of some of the teams that were bidding on him last year, and I'm sure some attribute his poor pitching to a sore shoulder last year. I think if we wait to trade him, his value will probably drop even lower and we'll have 2 years of albatross contract on our hands.
Spaceboy88
12-27-05, 02:08 PM
If Bubba and Bernie aren't playing RF for an extended stint, and like I said, Bernie isn't playing there at all. That means Sheffield is. Putting together a team is all about maximizing value. A player like Wilkerson who can put up an .800+ OPS, while effectively rotating between 1B, RF, DH, and sometimes LF and CF and is making a reasonable salary is more valuable to us (or almost any team for that matter) than a pitcher who is grossly overpaid for his ability and likely will in no way solve our pitching problems for next year whether he pitches for us or not.
While Pavano's value isn't at its alltime high (sadly that was when we bought him) it isn't at its all time low...yet. His '04 season is still probably fresh in the minds of some of the teams that were bidding on him last year, and I'm sure some attribute his poor pitching to a sore shoulder last year. I think if we wait to trade him, his value will probably drop even lower and we'll have 2 years of albatross contract on our hands.
And who do we use to fill his spot in the rotation?
MTYankee23
12-27-05, 02:12 PM
And who do we use to fill his spot in the rotation?
Assuming that our 4 best starters last year were Johnson, Mussina, Wang, and Chacon?
We fill the all important 5 spot in the rotation with any combination of the following that's NOT earning 30 million over the next 3 years.
Small, Wright, Henn, Villone, Sturtze, DePaula, Karstens, DeSalvo, etc. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with the above competing for a spot in the rotation vs. just having it handed to them.
ShaneTravis
12-27-05, 02:15 PM
And who do we use to fill his spot in the rotation?
There is alot of pitching, if someone could be moved for DH/OF duties it would make alot of sense.
Randy Johnson
Mike Mussina
Carl Pavano
Shawn Chacon
Chien-Ming Wang
Jaret Wright
Aaron Small
Mariano Rivera
Mike Myers
Octavio Dotel
Kyle Farnsworth
Tanyon Sturtze
Ron Villone
Colter Bean
Matt Smith
Jorge De Paula
T.J. Beam
Jason Anderson
Scott Proctor
Matt DeSalvo
Sean Henn
And who do we use to fill his spot in the rotation?
The same guy you have to use when he's on the DL?
Spaceboy88
12-27-05, 02:20 PM
As much as I love Small, there's no way that we can trade Pavano and expect him to be our #5 guy.
Wright has to be in the bullpen. He only had one successful year as a starter. His shoulder is too delicate to be pitching 6 or 7 innings every 5 games and is much better utilized in the bullpen and in spot starts.
Sturtze can't cut it as a starter, history has proven that to be the case for the most part. He was lights-out last year for a time until Joe overused him.
Villone was brought in to relief in certain situations, certainly not take the #5 spot in the starting rotation.
Henn, Karstens and DeSalvo: Why would we want to let these guys duke it out for the #5 spot when we could leave Pavano in that place who's had proven success.
Pavano had some really great moments last year and had he not been injured, quite possibly could've been a big success. I don't think dumping him for Wilkerson makes any sense now, even with the possibility that his contract may be an albatross down the line. It's too big of a risk to trade away a proven starting pitcher with no sure replacement in your plan, and letting a bunch of relief pitchers and unproven starters compete for a spot in the rotation on a team of this calibur and expectations is just insane.
Spaceboy88
12-27-05, 02:21 PM
The same guy you have to use when he's on the DL?
A lot easier to fill the hole with a spot starter than to go the whole season with a #5 spot by committee.
Kulish29
12-27-05, 02:27 PM
As Yankees1962 and others have posted many times, I dont think the Yankees can afford to trade any of their starting pitching. Not with the injury concerns the starting rotation has.
If the rotation is looking healthy and well nearing the AS Break, that would be the time to trade someone for a need. But until then, the starting pitching should be left alone.
MTYankee23
12-27-05, 02:28 PM
As much as I love Small, there's no way that we can trade Pavano and expect him to be our #5 guy.
Henn, Karstens and DeSalvo: Why would we want to let these guys duke it out for the #5 spot when we could leave Pavano in that place who's had proven success.
Pavano had some really great moments last year and had he not been injured, quite possibly could've been a big success. I don't think dumping him for Wilkerson makes any sense now, even with the possibility that his contract may be an albatross down the line. It's too big of a risk to trade away a proven starting pitcher with no sure replacement in your plan, and letting a bunch of relief pitchers and unproven starters compete for a spot in the rotation on a team of this calibur and expectations is just insane.
We're talking about the 5 starter role on opening day right? Not Game 1 ALDS starter here. I think there's more evidence that Carl Pavano is a decidedly average pitcher who, surprise, surprise, generated a good walk year. His peripherals are mediocre, he gets hurt quite a bit, and he's overpaid.
The problem with forgoing actual competition for "proven starting pitching" is that if Pavano is on the team, he's the 5th starter, whether he has a 5+ Era at the end of April or not.
What's also funny is that Pavano has had about as much Proven Success as Aaron Small, but most people seem to think that Pavano will bounce back, and Small will fall off the face of the Earth.
As Yankees1962 and others have posted many times, I dont think the Yankees can afford to trade any of their starting pitching. Not with the injury concerns the starting rotation has.
If the rotation is looking healthy and well nearing the AS Break, that would be the time to trade someone for a need. But until then, the starting pitching should be left alone.
The Yankees have a need for an everyday outfielder to start against righties now. Until they address that, it is costing the team almost every day. Trading Sturtze or the like, a guy who should be pitching meaningless innings anyway, for someone who will have a real impact seems a no-brainer. Pavano is obviously a bigger issue, but when you get down to it, this is a guy who has been hurt every year since 1998 but 1. He will be hurt again. There is an inherent lack of certainty in his production, and if you can exchange that for something more certain, I think you should.
Spaceboy88
12-27-05, 02:35 PM
What's also funny is that Pavano has had about as much Proven Success as Aaron Small, but most people seem to think that Pavano will bounce back, and Small will fall off the face of the Earth.
I think the reasoning for that is that Aaron Small's career ERA is 4.90 with a 1.57 WHIP over 23 games. Pavano's is 4.27 with a 1.35 WHIP over 184 games.
Pavano's also 29 while Small is 34.
MTYankee23
12-27-05, 02:39 PM
I think the reasoning for that is that Aaron Small's career ERA is 4.90 with a 1.57 WHIP over 23 games. Pavano's is 4.27 with a 1.35 WHIP over 184 games.
Pavano's also 29 while Small is 34.
Don't forget that Pavano pitched almost entirely in the National League East throughout his career with a career K/9 under 6, which is not even average, its bad.
I'm not saying that Small is AS GOOD as Pavano either. What I am saying is that in the 5 slot, you could live with Small (or one of the young pitchers mentioned) if it meant that you were improving your offense, your defense, and your bench.
You could also live with them if they offered you a savings of about 4-5 million a year over what you're paying Pavano.
Spaceboy88
12-27-05, 02:40 PM
The Yankees have a need for an everyday outfielder to start against righties now. Until they address that, it is costing the team almost every day. Trading Sturtze or the like, a guy who should be pitching meaningless innings anyway, for someone who will have a real impact seems a no-brainer. Pavano is obviously a bigger issue, but when you get down to it, this is a guy who has been hurt every year since 1998 but 1. He will be hurt again. There is an inherent lack of certainty in his production, and if you can exchange that for something more certain, I think you should.
I would have no problem trading away Sturtze, Proctor or Henn for Wilkerson, but replacing a starting pitcher at this stage in the game is going to be very, very tough. If this was an option back in November, I'd be all for shipping Pavano out while we can get some kind of ROI, but at this point, it's too late and we have to take the chance that he will be healthy and on the opening day roster. If and when he gets injured, then you can test other people to fill the number 5 spot and perhaps you'll find lightning in a bottle again like the Yankees got with Small last year. Until that bridge comes, we can't automatically write Pavano off and trade him with no reasonable backup plan, no matter how great the chance he will be injured again is.
Spaceboy88
12-27-05, 02:42 PM
Don't forget that Pavano pitched almost entirely in the National League East throughout his career with a career K/9 under 6, which is not even average, its bad.
I'm not saying that Small is AS GOOD as Pavano either. What I am saying is that in the 5 slot, you could live with Small (or one of the young pitchers mentioned) if it meant that you were improving your offense, your defense, and your bench.
You could also live with them if they offered you a savings of about 4-5 million a year over what you're paying Pavano.
If Small wasn't 34, I'd agree with you, but Small is no Roger Clemens or Curt Schilling, and I seriously doubt he's going to be some freak of nature guy who's pitching at almost 40 years old.
It's too big a risk right now to automatically assume that Small, who's only pitched 23 career games at the Major League level is a sufficent replacement for Pavano right now.
MTYankee23
12-27-05, 02:45 PM
I would have no problem trading away Sturtze, Proctor or Henn for Wilkerson, but replacing a starting pitcher at this stage in the game is going to be very, very tough. If this was an option back in November, I'd be all for shipping Pavano out while we can get some kind of ROI, but at this point, it's too late and we have to take the chance that he will be healthy and on the opening day roster. If and when he gets injured, then you can test other people to fill the number 5 spot and perhaps you'll find lightning in a bottle again like the Yankees got with Small last year. Until that bridge comes, we can't automatically write Pavano off and trade him with no reasonable backup plan, no matter how great the chance he will be injured again is.
Right now is also the time when his trade value will be at its HIGHEST. Why? Because there were a limited number of starting pitchers available, but a large number of teams with that particular hole, and money to spend. In November, a team like say Philadelphia, might have thought they had a reasonable shot at a Millwood, Washburn, Burnett, etc. Now their only hope of acquiring a pitcher is through a trade, and while we don't have a surplus of quality starting pitching, I don't consider Pavano a quality starting pitcher, especially for the money he makes, but some people will in fact look at the 18-8 season and his age, and take a chance.
Even if he doesn't get injured (he will) he will probably pitch to about a 4.50 ERA (probably worse). This was a mistake signing, we shouldn't compound this mistake by hanging on to him to fill a void that he likely wouldn't be able to fill anyhow.
MTYankee23
12-27-05, 02:46 PM
If Small wasn't 34, I'd agree with you, but Small is no Roger Clemens or Curt Schilling, and I seriously doubt he's going to be some freak of nature guy who's pitching at almost 40 years old.
It's too big a risk right now to automatically assume that Small, who's only pitched 23 career games at the Major League level is a sufficent replacement for Pavano right now.
No one needs Aaron Small to be Clemens, Schilling, or even Chien-Ming Wang.
A sufficient replacement for Carl Pavano will eat innings, and keep his ERA under 5.00 while not earning $10 million. That's not a big risk at all.
Spaceboy88
12-27-05, 02:51 PM
Right now is also the time when his trade value will be at its HIGHEST. Why? Because there were a limited number of starting pitchers available, but a large number of teams with that particular hole, and money to spend. In November, a team like say Philadelphia, might have thought they had a reasonable shot at a Millwood, Washburn, Burnett, etc. Now their only hope of acquiring a pitcher is through a trade, and while we don't have a surplus of quality starting pitching, I don't consider Pavano a quality starting pitcher, especially for the money he makes, but some people will in fact look at the 18-8 season and his age, and take a chance.
Even if he doesn't get injured (he will) he will probably pitch to about a 4.50 ERA (probably worse). This was a mistake signing, we shouldn't compound this mistake by hanging on to him to fill a void that he likely wouldn't be able to fill anyhow.
I can live with a 4.50 ERA with Pavano. Hell, Mussina was a 4.41 and I wouldn't consider 2005 to be a horrible season for him. With the offensive capabilities that the Yankees have this year, a 4.50 Pavano is, in my mind, a better option that a 5.81 career Scott Proctor ERA.
I would have no problem trading away Sturtze, Proctor or Henn for Wilkerson, but replacing a starting pitcher at this stage in the game is going to be very, very tough. If this was an option back in November, I'd be all for shipping Pavano out while we can get some kind of ROI, but at this point, it's too late and we have to take the chance that he will be healthy and on the opening day roster. If and when he gets injured, then you can test other people to fill the number 5 spot and perhaps you'll find lightning in a bottle again like the Yankees got with Small last year. Until that bridge comes, we can't automatically write Pavano off and trade him with no reasonable backup plan, no matter how great the chance he will be injured again is.
I'd much rather create the 'hole' now than in May. At this juncture, Pavano will be hurt and/or ineffective. It is a virtual certainty. I can either move him and spend the rest of the offseason and ST working to address that or I can wait for it to happn midseason again and scramble again. In the meantime, I can address an issue that is just as important, an everyday player, right now.
Spaceboy88
12-27-05, 02:53 PM
No one needs Aaron Small to be Clemens, Schilling, or even Chien-Ming Wang.
A sufficient replacement for Carl Pavano will eat innings, and keep his ERA under 5.00 while not earning $10 million. That's not a big risk at all.
And who do we have that can guarantee that? Small is the only one that is a possibility, but with only 23 career games, there's no sure bet that he's going to be that great next season. Besides, his 10-0 record was very deceptive and the Yankees offense got him out of a few would-be losses.
MTYankee23
12-27-05, 02:56 PM
I'd much rather create the 'hole' now than in May. At this juncture, Pavano will be hurt and/or ineffective. It is a virtual certainty. I can either move him and spend the rest of the offseason and ST working to address that or I can wait for it to happn midseason again and scramble again. In the meantime, I can address an issue that is just as important, an everyday player, right now.
Also, in May, the number of teams willing to make a trade will likely have dwindled, due to poor starts, developing rookies, etc. Plus you run the risk that Pavano is injured by then.
Also, the point is not whether you'd take a 4.50 era from Pavano or whether Moose's 4.40 is acceptable.
A. No one is trading for Mussina's 17 Million dollar contract.
B. I wouldn't accept 4.50 from a 29 year old 3/30 pitcher. And that's probably at the better end of what you can expect. His era was 5+ in May and June last year.
I'd sign up for a 4.5 ERA from Pavano in 35 starts. With that, he's only giving up a little over 3 earned runs per 7 innings pitched.. and with our new bullpen, the chances of closing out those games and converting wins has increased over last year.
And who do we have that can guarantee that? Small is the only one that is a possibility, but with only 23 career games, there's no sure bet that he's going to be that great next season. Besides, his 10-0 record was very deceptive and the Yankees offense got him out of a few would-be losses.
Aaron Small has appeared in 161 games in his career, actually. You seem to be leaving out 1994-1998.
Spaceboy88
12-27-05, 02:59 PM
I'd much rather create the 'hole' now than in May. At this juncture, Pavano will be hurt and/or ineffective. It is a virtual certainty. I can either move him and spend the rest of the offseason and ST working to address that or I can wait for it to happn midseason again and scramble again. In the meantime, I can address an issue that is just as important, an everyday player, right now.
This is where we differ. I'd rather keep Pavano (unless he can be traded for starting pitching only), and hope he stays healthy. If he's injured, we utilize our other options...Small, Wright, Proctor, Henn, or any other pitcher with some success in Columbus until Pavano is healthy or a player can be acquired to fill the hole at the trade deadline.
The replacement we will get at this point in time for Pavano is going to be most likely on an equal level or lower than Pavano's potential abilities when the opportunities at the trade deadline of the '06 season could yield much better options on teams already out of the race.
MTYankee23
12-27-05, 03:00 PM
And who do we have that can guarantee that? Small is the only one that is a possibility, but with only 23 career games, there's no sure bet that he's going to be that great next season. Besides, his 10-0 record was very deceptive and the Yankees offense got him out of a few would-be losses.
I don't agree that Small is the only possibility. Although I don't think its unrealistic to think that someone who pitched to a 3.20 era over half a season in the AL East could put up an era between 4.50 and 5.00 in the 5 slot while eating innings and most importantly NOT earn $10 million to do so.
Basically what you're saying is, instead of trading Pavano, improving the lineup, defense, and team depth, while saving money. You'll take a chance on a "proven starter" who with the exception of his walk year, has been proven to be mediocre, when its just as likely that the best of 5 or so available options, can produce the same results at a fraction of the cost?
Spaceboy88
12-27-05, 03:05 PM
Aaron Small has appeared in 161 games in his career, actually. You seem to be leaving out 1994-1998.
With the exception of 1996, when he had 3, he never was a starting pitcher between 1994-1998. Yes, he has appeared in 161 games total.
Spaceboy88
12-27-05, 03:14 PM
Basically what you're saying is, instead of trading Pavano, improving the lineup, defense, and team depth, while saving money. You'll take a chance on a "proven starter" who with the exception of his walk year, has been proven to be mediocre, when its just as likely that the best of 5 or so available options, can produce the same results at a fraction of the cost?
It doesn't improve the entire team depth. The pitching depth will be affected greatly unless you can replace Pavano with a bonafide starter.
Aside from his 2004 season when he had a 3.00 ERA, he also had a 3.06 in 2000 and a 3.79 in 2002. Yes, he had a couple of stinker years along with them, but he is a capable pitcher who CAN be very good if he has a good year.
This is where we differ. I'd rather keep Pavano (unless he can be traded for starting pitching only), and hope he stays healthy. If he's injured, we utilize our other options...Small, Wright, Proctor, Henn, or any other pitcher with some success in Columbus until Pavano is healthy or a player can be acquired to fill the hole at the trade deadline.
The replacement we will get at this point in time for Pavano is going to be most likely on an equal level or lower than Pavano's potential abilities when the opportunities at the trade deadline of the '06 season could yield much better options on teams already out of the race.
So what you want to do is wait for Pavano to get hurt, then trade minor leaguers (where the Yankees are thin) to get a pitcher midseason (when the price is always higher) all while completely ignoring the fact that Bernie Williams is now playing almost every day (poorly) and Sheffield and Matsui continue to struggle in the field?
The defensive difference between an average corner outfielder and Sheff/Matsui is more than the difference between a 4.5 and a 5.0 ERA over 200 innings, and that's before you get into the offensive upgrade over Bernie. It's also assuming that Pavano can even be a league average pitcher (which isn't his MO...it's more likely that he's below league average with the slim, slim chance that he is good).
I'd rather trade Pavano now to address the everyday player need and make a run for Clemens in February. I'd rather trade Pavano now and stock up on Armas/Miller types. All of those pitchers have just as much, if not more, upside than Pavano, they don't need to be traded for, and they allow the Yankees to address another need.
It doesn't improve the entire team depth. The pitching depth will be affected greatly unless you can replace Pavano with a bonafide starter.
Aside from his 2004 season when he had a 3.00 ERA, he also had a 3.06 in 2000 and a 3.79 in 2002. Yes, he had a couple of stinker years along with them, but he is a capable pitcher who CAN be very good if he has a good year.
He pitched 97 innings in 2000, missing most of the season due to elbow problems.
He had a 5.16 ERA in 2002. The 3.79 is what he did following his trade from Montreal to Florida midseason. In addition, he was demoted to the bullpen in Florida because he continued to struggle as a starter. Still, he only managed 136 innings that year because of shoulder problems.
Spaceboy88
12-27-05, 03:31 PM
I'd rather trade Pavano now to address the everyday player need and make a run for Clemens in February. I'd rather trade Pavano now and stock up on Armas/Miller types. All of those pitchers have just as much, if not more, upside than Pavano, they don't need to be traded for, and they allow the Yankees to address another need.
So you'd rather trade away a starting pitcher that would probably be a #2 or #3 guy for the most MLB teams now for a player that the Yankees could perhaps acquire at a later date (or a player of his calibur), all the while hoping that the Yankees can win a bidding war for Roger Clemens that will cost at least $10 Million for a one year deal?
I'd much rather keep Pavano as insurance on our already questionable pitching rotation and address the everyday player needs mid-season when they can be acquired with excess relief pitching and cash that the Yankees already have.
So you'd rather trade away a starting pitcher that would probably be a #2 or #3 guy for the most MLB teams now for a player that the Yankees could perhaps acquire at a later date (or a player of his calibur), all the while hoping that the Yankees can win a bidding war for Roger Clemens that will cost at least $10 Million for a one year deal?
I'd much rather keep Pavano as insurance on our already questionable pitching rotation and address the everyday player needs mid-season when they can be acquired with excess relief pitching and cash that the Yankees already have.
Basic problem 1: Pavano is not a #2 or #3 on most teams. With one extreme exception, he is a below average major league pitcher (and no, less than half a season in 2000 is not above average).
Basic problem 2: The position players I'm interested in acquiring don't have Pavano's injury history. The risk is substatnially less. The benefits are far greater. As I already discussed, the defensive difference alone is equal to the difference between Pavano having a 4.5 ERA over 200 innings and some other pitcher having a 5.2 ERA over 200 innings. So as a team, all the Yankees need is that 5.2 guys to basically prevent the exact same amount of runs. On top of that, they gain offensively because Bernie can't hit. In other words, the Yankees actually come out ahead with a 5.2 ERA pitcher and, say, Wilkerson versus Pavano and Bernie. Now, if they can find someone to have an era better than 5.2, they are even more ahead.
Basic problem 3: Your solution is to make trades midseason. I would certainly rather pay Clemens $20M than be forced into a situation where I have to deal Duncan and Hughes to get a slightly above league average pitcher. These are the Yankees. What they can and should do is use their financial hammer to make these kind of short term moves. For them, it's only money, it doesn't cost the future. On top of that, Clemens is likely to be a better pitcher than Pavano. So now, you've got a better pitcher than Pavano plus the defensive gains of getting Sheff/Matsui out of the field plus the offensive advantages of not playing Bernie. In so doing, I've rid myself of the money I owe Pavano and spent some of it now instead of later and opened myself up to spend it on what appears to be a halfway decent free agent class.
Basic Problem 4: In a questionable rotation, the problem is that he's the biggest question right now (with Wright in the bullpen). If you want to address those questions, the easiest way to do it is to get rid of said biggest question.
JeffWeaverFan
12-27-05, 03:58 PM
I just don't understand why people believe Pavano is a #2 starter on other teams? He's a career average pitcher that can't stay healthy with one good, and out of context, season in his career.
Spaceboy88
12-27-05, 04:04 PM
I would certainly rather pay Clemens $20M than be forced into a situation where I have to deal Duncan and Hughes to get a slightly above league average pitcher. These are the Yankees. What they can and should do is use their financial hammer to make these kind of short term moves. For them, it's only money, it doesn't cost the future. On top of that, Clemens is likely to be a better pitcher than Pavano. So now, you've got a better pitcher than Pavano plus the defensive gains of getting Sheff/Matsui out of the field plus the offensive advantages of not playing Bernie. In so doing, I've rid myself of the money I owe Pavano and spent some of it now instead of later and opened myself up to spend it on what appears to be a halfway decent free agent class.
So you'd rather spend the $20 Million that the Yankees saved on Payroll thus far on a one year deal and bring them right back over the $200 Million mark, rather than send someone like Proctor, Henn + some cash for an equivelent pitcher at the trade deadline.
I'm not suggesting that we trade Duncan and Hughes for a mediocre pitcher. Come trade deadline and the Yankees need to replace a void in the rotation caused by an injured Pavano, there's no reason that perhaps Proctor, Henn and/or Cash can't be used to fill that hole, especially when dealing with teams out of the race looking to shed payroll.
Also, what's so wrong with starting the season with the team as-is and picking up a player of Wilkerson's calibur mid-season? We don't NEED Wilkerson now. Yes, he'd be a nice addition to the team and would really give them some insurance and versatility, but I don't justify trading away a starting pitcher that by all acounts should be 100% healthy to start the season to pick up a utility player right now. Perhaps if we had 7 bonafide starting pitchers (Johnson, Mussina, Chacon, Wang, Small, Wright and Pavano), but the chances of Johnson, Mussina, Wright and Pavano all being healthy are very slim, and we need all the insurance in that aspect of the team than in the defensive side where Sheffield and Bubba can get the job done well enough.
Spaceboy88
12-27-05, 04:13 PM
I just don't understand why people believe Pavano is a #2 starter on other teams? He's a career average pitcher that can't stay healthy with one good, and out of context, season in his career.
I think Pavano could easily be a #2 starter on a team like KC, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Tampa Bay or even Milwaukee (although he's most likely suited as a #3 guy there).
Stupid Flanders
12-27-05, 04:15 PM
So you'd rather trade away a starting pitcher that would probably be a #2 or #3 guy for the most MLB teams now for a player that the Yankees could perhaps acquire at a later date (or a player of his calibur), all the while hoping that the Yankees can win a bidding war for Roger Clemens that will cost at least $10 Million for a one year deal?
Yes
I don't think the dropoff from Pavano to Wright is that severe. The team gets better whether or not Clemens is on board
JeffWeaverFan
12-27-05, 04:21 PM
I think Pavano could easily be a #2 starter on a team like KC, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Tampa Bay or even Milwaukee (although he's most likely suited as a #3 guy there).
He'd be the #1 guy in KC unless Greinke finally stepped it up.
#3 guy in Cincinnati after Harang and Claussen.
#2 guy in Pittsburgh after Duke and possibly the #3 guy after Oliver Perez if he pitches like he did in 2004.
#2 in TB after Kazmir.
#4 in Milwaukee after Sheets, Capuano, and Doug Davis.
So you'd rather spend the $20 Million that the Yankees saved on Payroll thus far on a one year deal and bring them right back over the $200 Million mark, rather than send someone like Proctor, Henn + some cash for an equivelent pitcher at the trade deadline.
I'm not suggesting that we trade Duncan and Hughes for a mediocre pitcher. Come trade deadline and the Yankees need to replace a void in the rotation caused by an injured Pavano, there's no reason that perhaps Proctor, Henn and/or Cash can't be used to fill that hole, especially when dealing with teams out of the race looking to shed payroll.
Also, what's so wrong with starting the season with the team as-is and picking up a player of Wilkerson's calibur mid-season? We don't NEED Wilkerson now. Yes, he'd be a nice addition to the team and would really give them some insurance and versatility, but I don't justify trading away a starting pitcher that by all acounts should be 100% healthy to start the season to pick up a utility player right now. Perhaps if we had 7 bonafide starting pitchers (Johnson, Mussina, Chacon, Wang, Small, Wright and Pavano), but the chances of Johnson, Mussina, Wright and Pavano all being healthy are very slim, and we need all the insurance in that aspect of the team than in the defensive side where Sheffield and Bubba can get the job done well enough.
1. Proctor and Henn are not getting any team an average starting pitcher midseason. They aren't getting an average starting pitcher offseason even. If you go into the season knowing that Pavano is going to get hurt and wanting a better than league average pitcher back in a trade, then you are going to trade what few chips the Yankees have. That pitcher (in fact, probably a better version) already exists in Clemens, and you don't have to trade anything for him. In the long run, losing the cost certainty of young players costs a hell of a lot more than one up front balloon payment to Roger. In addition, the Yankees also get out of the money they are paying Pavano over the next few years.
2. If you try to acquire Wilkeson midseason, you can't deal Pavano for him without getting into the same issues as above. Either he's hurt and he has no value or he's healthy you can't trade him without creating a hole in the rotation that you then have to fill by...trading Duncan, Hughes, etc. If you trade Pavano now, you can make other moves like going after Clemens without giving up any additional players. In addition, as I've already tried to show, the value that a Wilkerson type provides is actually quite substantial. Not only do you not want to wait until midseason to address the defensive issues they have in RF and LF and the offensive issues they have at DH, but you also increase the chances of Sheffield once again getting nicked up, etc. the longer you force him into the field every day.
3. There is no indication that Pavano is 100% healthy and there is certainly no reason to believe that, after being hurt every year of his major league career but one, he is going to stay healthy.
4. Wilkerson isn't a 'utility' player. He's an everyday player who just happens to be flexible enough to play 3 of the positions where the Yankees need defensive help.
5. If you want insurance, replacing Pavano with a better pitcher seems to be a good start.
Spaceboy88
12-27-05, 04:23 PM
Wright is MUCH less durable than Pavano! The sooner Wright accepts the fact that he's NOT a starting pitcher, the better off we all will be.
Stupid Flanders
12-27-05, 04:28 PM
Wright is MUCH less durable than Pavano! The sooner Wright accepts the fact that he's NOT a starting pitcher, the better off we all will be.I am perfectly comfortable with him as a #5. If he gets hurt, there are plenty of options
Spaceboy88
12-27-05, 04:33 PM
1. Proctor and Henn are not getting any team an average starting pitcher midseason. They aren't getting an average starting pitcher offseason even. If you go into the season knowing that Pavano is going to get hurt and wanting a better than league average pitcher back in a trade, then you are going to trade what few chips the Yankees have. That pitcher (in fact, probably a better version) already exists in Clemens, and you don't have to trade anything for him. In the long run, losing the cost certainty of young players costs a hell of a lot more than one up front balloon payment to Roger. In addition, the Yankees also get out of the money they are paying Pavano over the next few years.
2. If you try to acquire Wilkeson midseason, you can't deal Pavano for him without getting into the same issues as above. Either he's hurt and he has no value or he's healthy you can't trade him without creating a hole in the rotation that you then have to fill by...trading Duncan, Hughes, etc. If you trade Pavano now, you can make other moves like going after Clemens without giving up any additional players. In addition, as I've already tried to show, the value that a Wilkerson type provides is actually quite substantial. Not only do you not want to wait until midseason to address the defensive issues they have in RF and LF and the offensive issues they have at DH, but you also increase the chances of Sheffield once again getting nicked up, etc. the longer you force him into the field every day.
3. There is no indication that Pavano is 100% healthy and there is certainly no reason to believe that, after being hurt every year of his major league career but one, he is going to stay healthy.
4. Wilkerson isn't a 'utility' player. He's an everyday player who just happens to be flexible enough to play 3 of the positions where the Yankees need defensive help.
5. If you want insurance, replacing Pavano with a better pitcher seems to be a good start.
1. You're forgetting the "and cash." Proctor, Henn and Cash for the right amount could get a replacement for Pavano if you get a team with an expendible #4 or 5 guy. We're not talking about superstars here.
2. I'm not saying it has to be only Wilkerson for Pavano. I'm saying we can address the utility issue mid-season when we have a greater idea of how the team is performing/underperforming and what areas we need the most help in. It doesn't have to be Wilkerson, it could be another multi-position player, and if Wilkerson is on the Yankees, he's most likely going to be a utility player.
3. There are many published reports that state Pavano is cleared and healthy.
4. (See #3)
5. There's no guarantee that Clemens will even come back, let alone come back and play for the Yankees. Until Clemens says he wants to play in Pinstripes, I don't think the Yankees are going to find any better pitchers than Pavano that don't require giving up big prospects than nobody wants to lose.
Kulish29
12-27-05, 04:39 PM
The Yankees have a need for an everyday outfielder to start against righties now. Until they address that, it is costing the team almost every day. Trading Sturtze or the like, a guy who should be pitching meaningless innings anyway, for someone who will have a real impact seems a no-brainer. Pavano is obviously a bigger issue, but when you get down to it, this is a guy who has been hurt every year since 1998 but 1. He will be hurt again. There is an inherent lack of certainty in his production, and if you can exchange that for something more certain, I think you should.
I have no problem trading Sturtze now that the bullpen is looking the way it is. If they can get something decent for him, they should. I just dont think they should touch the starting rotation because there are to many injury question marks.
1. You're forgetting the "and cash." Proctor, Henn and Cash for the right amount could get a replacement for Pavano if you get a team with an expendible #4 or 5 guy. We're not talking about superstars here.
2. I'm not saying it has to be only Wilkerson for Pavano. I'm saying we can address the utility issue mid-season when we have a greater idea of how the team is performing/underperforming and what areas we need the most help in. It doesn't have to be Wilkerson, it could be another multi-position player, and if Wilkerson is on the Yankees, he's most likely going to be a utility player.
3. There are many published reports that state Pavano is cleared and healthy.
4. (See #3)
5. There's no guarantee that Clemens will even come back, let alone come back and play for the Yankees. Until Clemens says he wants to play in Pinstripes, I don't think the Yankees are going to find any better pitchers than Pavano that don't require giving up big prospects than nobody wants to lose.
1. The Yankees already have back of the rotation starters in excess. They don't need to trade for them. You are the one who doesn't think they are good enough to take Pavano's innings. If the Yankees want to get better than what they have, it's going to cost more than Proctor, Henn, and Cash in a midseason deal. Teams get impact back midseason for marginal relievers, let along an average to above average starter.
2. The Yankees have a hole in their everyday lineup right now. It is a hole that costs them both offensively and defensively. It is a hole that forces their mid-thirties players to play the field every day, especially Giambi and Sheffield, who have a history of nagging injuries that, though they play, effect performance. In addition, as noted, in order to address these things midseason, who are you going to trade? Pavano? What does that solve?
3. After being hurt in 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, and 2005, in all likelihood, he's going to get hurt again even if he feels fine now (and that is debatable given that shoulder problems just don't disappear).
4. n/a
5. Tony Armas and Wade Miller. They are just as big an injury risk but are better pitchers than Pavano over their careers. Armas is currently pitching in the VWL. If you combine them with what the Yankees already have, I don't see a huge difference in performance between them and Pavano. I think the Yankees can buy Clemens, but if they can't, there are other solutions that, like Clemens, can be had without trading players. And again, if you think Pavano is a 4.5 ERA guy, all I need is a 5.2 ERA to break even in team run prevention. That gives me some leeway and opens the door for a number of guys who are still out there. Then, I can take the run scoring games and walk away happy.
I have no problem trading Sturtze now that the bullpen is looking the way it is. If they can get something decent for him, they should. I just dont think they should touch the starting rotation because there are to many injury question marks.
Again, the problem is that Pavano is the biggest one of those question marks in the current starting 5. If you can replace him with any kind of certainty in the rotation, you are addressing those issues.
Yankees1962
12-27-05, 04:55 PM
I have no problem trading Sturtze now that the bullpen is looking the way it is. If they can get something decent for him, they should. I just dont think they should touch the starting rotation because there are to many injury question marks.
Agreed and furthermore, I don't think the Yankees are ready to deal any starting pitching until late March.
Matsui55
12-27-05, 08:04 PM
Agreed and furthermore, I don't think the Yankees are ready to deal any starting pitching until late March.
While I would NORMALLY agree wholeheartedly with your base assumption (that you should always see what you and everyone else has in ST before you make a move), I think this winter is an exception to the rule.
This winter, teams are throwing filthy money at anyone who has ever made 30 decent starts in a season or ever won more than 15 games, even if it was only once. It is ever worse than last winter, when the Yanks burned themselves.
Right now, it does appear that the Dodgers and a couple other clubs are feeling like they are being left out, and may be desperate. I personally believe that Cashman has probably made all the calls and done his due diligence on the matter, but I think a deal could be made for Pavano in Jan/Feb, if the right players were offered.
Anytime Washburn is getting $10M+ for four years and Millwood will get five years and bigger $$$, the market is out of balance. What I would be more afraid of is the Red Sox trying to plug the market gap with Wells and Arroyo, and getting top quality in return, while we sit on our hands with 7 starters.
YankeePride1967
12-27-05, 08:07 PM
While I would NORMALLY agree wholeheartedly with your base assumption (that you should always see what you and everyone else has in ST before you make a move), I think this winter is an exception to the rule.
This winter, teams are throwing filthy money at anyone who has ever made 30 decent starts in a season or ever won more than 15 games, even if it was only once. It is ever worse than last winter, when the Yanks burned themselves.
Right now, it does appear that the Dodgers and a couple other clubs are feeling like they are being left out, and may be desperate. I personally believe that Cashman has probably made all the calls and done his due diligence on the matter, but I think a deal could be made for Pavano in Jan/Feb, if the right players were offered.
Anytime Washburn is getting $10M+ for four years and Millwood will get five years and bigger $$$, the market is out of balance. What I would be more afraid of is the Red Sox trying to plug the market gap with Wells and Arroyo, and getting top quality in return, while we sit on our hands with 7 starters.
Considering how the Yanks have ? marks in their rotation health wise, I think the Yanks would be better off waiting for ST unless something we just can't say no to comes along.
While I would NORMALLY agree wholeheartedly with your base assumption (that you should always see what you and everyone else has in ST before you make a move), I think this winter is an exception to the rule.
This winter, teams are throwing filthy money at anyone who has ever made 30 decent starts in a season or ever won more than 15 games, even if it was only once. It is ever worse than last winter, when the Yanks burned themselves.
Right now, it does appear that the Dodgers and a couple other clubs are feeling like they are being left out, and may be desperate. I personally believe that Cashman has probably made all the calls and done his due diligence on the matter, but I think a deal could be made for Pavano in Jan/Feb, if the right players were offered.
Anytime Washburn is getting $10M+ for four years and Millwood will get five years and bigger $$$, the market is out of balance. What I would be more afraid of is the Red Sox trying to plug the market gap with Wells and Arroyo, and getting top quality in return, while we sit on our hands with 7 starters.
Agreed. On top of that, I am far from confident that Pavano even makes it out of ST. Getting rid of the problem before pitchers and catchers report makes that moot.
ryanthe13th
12-27-05, 08:15 PM
The entire idea of Wilkerson coming to NY should be moot now that we have Damon, Bernie, and Bubba. It won't kill the team to throw Bubba in RF for a few games in order to DH Sheffield and give Giambi a rest while our bench 1B takes the field against a few of the weaker teams in the league.
longtimeyankeefan
12-27-05, 09:20 PM
Agreed. On top of that, I am far from confident that Pavano even makes it out of ST. Getting rid of the problem before pitchers and catchers report makes that moot.
If you are concerned that Pavano won't even make it out of spring training, then why are you opposed to the idea of getting rid of Pavano now?
Under your logic, Pavano becomes worthless when he breaks down in spring training. Trade him now and get something for him - anything, even a bag of batting practice balls for the minor league field.
MTYankee23
12-27-05, 09:46 PM
While I would NORMALLY agree wholeheartedly with your base assumption (that you should always see what you and everyone else has in ST before you make a move), I think this winter is an exception to the rule.
This winter, teams are throwing filthy money at anyone who has ever made 30 decent starts in a season or ever won more than 15 games, even if it was only once. It is ever worse than last winter, when the Yanks burned themselves.
Right now, it does appear that the Dodgers and a couple other clubs are feeling like they are being left out, and may be desperate. I personally believe that Cashman has probably made all the calls and done his due diligence on the matter, but I think a deal could be made for Pavano in Jan/Feb, if the right players were offered.
Anytime Washburn is getting $10M+ for four years and Millwood will get five years and bigger $$$, the market is out of balance. What I would be more afraid of is the Red Sox trying to plug the market gap with Wells and Arroyo, and getting top quality in return, while we sit on our hands with 7 starters.
Well put, and this is exactly how I feel and what i'm afraid of. The fact that some people want to sit on a high priced starter because they think if he gets it together he can pitch to a 4.50 ERA when we have several low priced starters who can pitch to an equivalent era is scary.
ryanthe13th
12-28-05, 07:02 AM
Again, the problem is that Pavano is the biggest one of those question marks in the current starting 5. If you can replace him with any kind of certainty in the rotation, you are addressing those issues.
I don't agree with this. Pavano usually follows the pattern of Hurt-Healthy-Hurt-Healthy. He was hurt last year, so his healthy year is coming up. I think the most unreliable pitcher on our staff, as much as I hate to say it, would be etheir Wang or Mussina(more Moose than Wang).
MTYankee23
12-28-05, 07:46 AM
I don't agree with this. Pavano usually follows the pattern of Hurt-Healthy-Hurt-Healthy. He was hurt last year, so his healthy year is coming up. I think the most unreliable pitcher on our staff, as much as I hate to say it, would be etheir Wang or Mussina(more Moose than Wang).
He was actually healthy in '03 and '04, and hurt every year otherwise (if by hurt you mean didn't make 30+ starts).
With the exception of '04, '00, and half of '02, he's been mediocre, and that's the true problem here. He does have value, he does have talent, but there's no sense in turning down potential trades that help the team in order to pay someone 3/30 who has been extremely inconsistent and injury prone.
I don't agree with this. Pavano usually follows the pattern of Hurt-Healthy-Hurt-Healthy. He was hurt last year, so his healthy year is coming up. I think the most unreliable pitcher on our staff, as much as I hate to say it, would be etheir Wang or Mussina(more Moose than Wang).
1997: Shoulder tightness in ST. IP held to 161. Traded to Montreal.
1998: Expected to start season in majors. Shoulder tightness in ST, starts season in extended ST and in AAA on a rehab assigment, starts major league season in late May.
1999: Placed on DL with sore elbow in July. Pitches sparingly the rest of the season.
2000: Placed on DL with elbow tendinitis on June 27. Surgery. Season over.
2001: Post surgical inflamation keeps Pavano on the DL until August.
2002: Still not feeling right, pulled from the rotation and demoted to AAA in June. Traded to the Marlins. Pitched out of the pen for Florida and then was put into the rotation when Burnett got hurt.
2003: Shoulder soreness in ST. Pitches through it for the whole season, but doesn't actually pitch well (94 ERA+).
2004: Felt good all year. Had his one good season.
2005: Makes his last start on June 28 and does not return with shoulder soreness.
I wouldn't be so adamant about it if the above were not the case. It's not every other year. It's not just some of the time. It's every single year but 1. Even in 2003, he didn't feel well, and if the result is that he's a below average innings eater in a best case scenario, it's time to move on and spend that money elsewhere.
ryanthe13th
12-28-05, 09:28 AM
With the exception of '04, '00, and half of '02, he's been mediocre, and that's the true problem here. He does have value, he does have talent, but there's no sense in turning down potential trades that help the team in order to pay someone 3/30 who has been extremely inconsistent and injury prone.
I don't expect Pavano to be throwing up ace like numbers. I think Pavano is good for 15 wins though, and I think that last year he showed us when he was focused and healthy that he can throw great ball.
MTYankee23
12-28-05, 10:03 AM
I don't expect Pavano to be throwing up ace like numbers. I think Pavano is good for 15 wins though, and I think that last year he showed us when he was focused and healthy that he can throw great ball.
His career high is 18. He's getting paid like a 2/3 starter. He's made 30+ starts only twice in his career. He only had 8 of 17 quality starts last year. 2 of those were in NL parks during interleague play. So in his 15 American League starts, he was 6 for 15. So overall 47% and AL 40%, which is not even average, nevermind $10 million a year worth.
He's a Right Handed, Moderate-Flyball pitcher, who doesn't strike anyone out. This is not a good combination, and definitely one which we can afford to trade.
ryanthe13th
12-28-05, 10:16 AM
His career high is 18. He's getting paid like a 2/3 starter. He's made 30+ starts only twice in his career. He only had 8 of 17 quality starts last year. 2 of those were in NL parks during interleague play. So in his 15 American League starts, he was 6 for 15. So overall 47% and AL 40%, which is not even average, nevermind $10 million a year worth.
He's a Right Handed, Moderate-Flyball pitcher, who doesn't strike anyone out. This is not a good combination, and definitely one which we can afford to trade.
So you would rather have Wright in the rotation instead of Pavano? Pavano may overrated, but Wright is the ultimate flyball pitcher, in the sense that the flyballs he gives up land on top of the Empire State Building.
Jeromy Burnitz makes sense too.
MTYankee23
12-28-05, 10:25 AM
So you would rather have Wright in the rotation instead of Pavano? Pavano may overrated, but Wright is the ultimate flyball pitcher, in the sense that the flyballs he gives up land on top of the Empire State Building.
That's not the correct question for this situation. Because a comparison of Wright vs. Pavano:
1. Does not sum up all the options you have to replace Pavano, it would be the pitcher who is throwing the best out of Wright, Small, De Paula, Henn, etc.
2. Also, this does not take place in a vacuum. While Pavano may be a better pitch than the options listed above, he also is more expensive than all of the above, while only being slightly more effective in some cases.
3. Does not take into consideration trade value. None of the pitchers listed above will bring back players to improve the team in other areas like Pavano would.
ryanthe13th
12-28-05, 10:26 AM
Burnitz would be a good DH option. Better than JT Snow or Eduardo Perez.
ShaneTravis
12-28-05, 10:30 AM
Burnitz is close to being signed...
"The Orioles are close to signing Jeromy Burnitz to a two-year deal worth $6 million per season"
source: Baltimore Sun
WORST signing this offseason if it happens. The horror..the horror
Quangormo
12-29-05, 09:45 AM
Wilkerson would be a great addition. He could rotate as you said and still play full time.
The Yankees could trade any combination of Pavano, Sturtze, Proctor, Henn to get him.
I'd hate to do it, but would you include Bubba (a Texan) in the package? That woudl help allay some of the Rangers' OF concerns. Proctor is the 13th pitcher on the Yankee staff, so he's available. And one of the starters (Pavano, Wright, etc.) could be expendable.
Quangormo
12-29-05, 09:54 AM
I would love to get Wilkerson, but it would take an arm and a leg to get him. Pavano + cash would definitely not work. My guess is the package would start with Wang and end with Hughes and I am not willing to do that.
I'm an unabashed Wilky fan. Last year was an aberration. He was quoted early on, when it was pointed out to him that three seats at RFK are painted white to commemorate Frank Howard blasts, that home plate must have been closer because hitting it up there would be basically impossible. (Home plate was in the same spot as in the Senators' days.)
He had terrific numbers in Montreal and RFK kills a lot of hitters. Jose Guillen had a pretty good power year for Washington, for example, hitting 21 HR. But he hit 18 on the road!
Maybe Thompson could help the Rangers. The Yankees are not going to make room for him. Ditto Colter Bean.
Wilky could be a terrific pickup because he can play 1B as well as all the OF positions. Whoever needs to DH tonight, Wilky can replace him. And he's fairly young, too. It's not like we're trading prospects for another 38-year-old.
I certainly don't want to trade Wang or Cano, but the Yankees have a couple of tradable pitchers and a surfeit of young OFs.
Quangormo
12-29-05, 10:02 AM
if were Bernie or thompson were an average hitter id be ok but they are really bad hitters.
Last season Bernie in 85 games as the Yankees DH hit .294. He also hit .278 with 1 HR and 4 RBIs in 11 Pinch Hit AB last season.
With just HALF the AB he nearly matched Giambi's RBI's, had half his HR, and had an almost .300 BA.
Quangormo
12-29-05, 10:12 AM
And who do we use to fill his spot in the rotation?The club has 7 starters: RJ, Moose, Pavano, Chacon, Wang, Wright, and Small. It also has no spot for Proctor right now (which may be a good thing.) Some pitcher is going.
Quangormo
12-29-05, 10:14 AM
There is alot of pitching, if someone could be moved for DH/OF duties it would make alot of sense.
Randy Johnson
Mike Mussina
Carl Pavano
Shawn Chacon
Chien-Ming Wang
Jaret Wright
Aaron Small
Mariano Rivera
Mike Myers
Octavio Dotel
Kyle Farnsworth
Tanyon Sturtze
Ron Villone
Colter Bean
Matt Smith
Jorge De Paula
T.J. Beam
Jason Anderson
Scott Proctor
Matt DeSalvo
Sean Henn
And Ramiro Mendoza. And maybe Leiter, whom I understadn has been invited to spring training.
Quangormo
12-29-05, 10:18 AM
I would have no problem trading away Sturtze, Proctor or Henn for Wilkerson, but replacing a starting pitcher at this stage in the game is going to be very, very tough. If this was an option back in November, I'd be all for shipping Pavano out while we can get some kind of ROI, but at this point, it's too late and we have to take the chance that he will be healthy and on the opening day roster. If and when he gets injured, then you can test other people to fill the number 5 spot and perhaps you'll find lightning in a bottle again like the Yankees got with Small last year. Until that bridge comes, we can't automatically write Pavano off and trade him with no reasonable backup plan, no matter how great the chance he will be injured again is.
We could always bring back Weaver. He's a free agent. :)
Or Shawn Estes.
Last season Bernie in 85 games as the Yankees DH hit .294. He also hit .278 with 1 HR and 4 RBIs in 11 Pinch Hit AB last season.
With just HALF the AB he nearly matched Giambi's RBI's, had half his HR, and had an almost .300 BA.
85 AB, not 85 games. From a projection standpoint, you have a serious issue here. Not only is 85 AB a small sample size, but you can't simply ignore what he did the rest of the season and expect him to magically hit just like he hits as a DH. In fact, this wasn't even the case in 2004, when he had 189 AB at DH but was substantially worse than when he played in the field.
The club has 7 starters: RJ, Moose, Pavano, Chacon, Wang, Wright, and Small. It also has no spot for Proctor right now (which may be a good thing.) Some pitcher is going.
Proctor has options, but without even counting him, the Yankees have too many pitchers on the ML roster.
Quangormo
12-29-05, 10:36 AM
Burnitz would be a good DH option. Better than JT Snow or Eduardo Perez.
Burnitz just signed with Bawlmore, which is a bad move by a totally clueless team.
JT Snow would be signed for defense, making Jason a DH, and JT has an OK bat. He "hits enough," as the saying goes. And he's a lefty, and a former Yankee farmhand (traded in the Jim Abbott deal.)
Burnitz just signed with Bawlmore, which is a bad move by a totally clueless team.
JT Snow would be signed for defense, making Jason a DH, and JT has an OK bat. He "hits enough," as the saying goes. And he's a lefty, and a former Yankee farmhand (traded in the Jim Abbott deal.)
Once upon a time, when he was a better defender (and he's nothing more than average now) and he hit more than he hits now, you could say that he hit enough, but that ship has sailed.
Wilkerson's stock will NEVER be lower than what it is right now. You have a guy who at age 26 hit 32 HR. He shows great patience at the plate and is an above average fielder. After the worst year of his career besides his rookie year (at a stadium that isn't friendly to power hitters) he gets traded to the Rangers, and Arlington is usually in the top five stadiums in HR. ZiPS projects Wilkerson at .280/.387/.504 w/ 24 HR (I'm not sure if that's in RFK or Arlington). After this year, he will be one of the premeir OF in the league and we wouldn't be able to trade for him. He would be a huge defensive improvement over Sheff and a huge offensive improvement over Bernie. If the price is reasonable, i would go for it.
ChinMusic
01-01-06, 11:20 AM
Don't forget that Pavano pitched almost entirely in the National League East throughout his career with a career K/9 under 6, which is not even average, its bad.
I'm not saying that Small is AS GOOD as Pavano either. What I am saying is that in the 5 slot, you could live with Small (or one of the young pitchers mentioned) if it meant that you were improving your offense, your defense, and your bench.
You could also live with them if they offered you a savings of about 4-5 million a year over what you're paying Pavano.
Not only that, I think Small would be at least a .500 pitcher behind this lineup even if he pitches to his career ERA. What more do you want out of a #5 starter?
I'm an unabashed Wilky fan. Last year was an aberration. He was quoted early on, when it was pointed out to him that three seats at RFK are painted white to commemorate Frank Howard blasts, that home plate must have been closer because hitting it up there would be basically impossible. (Home plate was in the same spot as in the Senators' days.)
He had terrific numbers in Montreal and RFK kills a lot of hitters. Jose Guillen had a pretty good power year for Washington, for example, hitting 21 HR. But he hit 18 on the road!
Maybe Thompson could help the Rangers. The Yankees are not going to make room for him. Ditto Colter Bean.
Wilky could be a terrific pickup because he can play 1B as well as all the OF positions. Whoever needs to DH tonight, Wilky can replace him. And he's fairly young, too. It's not like we're trading prospects for another 38-year-old.
I certainly don't want to trade Wang or Cano, but the Yankees have a couple of tradable pitchers and a surfeit of young OFs.
If Brad Wilkerson can be had at reasonable cost ( i.e. > Womack but < Cano/Wang), I'm confident Cashman would be all over it. Truth is if we want someone of Wilkerson's calibre (who will turn Sheffield into a DH and effectively remove Bernie from the mix), then we can expect to pay a price.
Is Pavano part of that price? I don't know. Only the Yankees and Rangers can determine that but let's not think that all of a sudden Brad Wilkerson becomes our number 7 batter and starting RF er merely because we would like it to be so. Yet, this line-up with Wilkerson in RF and Sheff at DH would be one lean, mean, run-producing machine that would very easily withstand the loss of a Carl Pavano type season from the rotation. If the Rangers would bite at a Pavano + (Sturtze, Proctor, or "B" prospect) for Wilkerson , then the Yankees got to do it.
Jersey Yankee
01-01-06, 09:37 PM
I don't like Nix at all, and right now the likelihood is that after the Millwood signing the Rangers won't go after high priced pitchers. So a Pavano trade would be out of the question.
That said, this is dangerous thinking. We have a lot of question marks with our pitching staff, but this is not a reason to hang on to a question mark that can be used to improve other areas of our team by trading for a non-question mark in another area.
Sheffield is ideally suited at this point in his career for DH duty, and sparse outfield work. This does 2 things, improves Sheffield's offense, and also improves our pitching by improving the outfield defense.
I'll agree with you about the part about Texas not being interested in another hi-priced pitcher, per their own new contracts. I also agree that the Yanks should be very careful about which pitchers they trade away, per the existing question marks.
What I'm trying to find out is, how do you know that playing DH will benefit or hurt Sheffield? He only played 23 games there in 2005, so a very small sample sit.
I'll agree with you about the part about Texas not being interested in another hi-priced pitcher, per their own new contracts. I also agree that the Yanks should be very careful about which pitchers they trade away, per the existing question marks.
What I'm trying to find out is, how do you know that playing DH will benefit or hurt Sheffield? He only played 23 games there in 2005, so a very small sample sit.
If you had used the word per in that third sentence you would have broken the NYYFans.com record for most sentences in a row with the word per.
Congrats on the tie.
If you had used the word per in that third sentence you would have broken the NYYFans.com record for most sentences in a row with the word per.
Congrats on the tie.
That record is per your own count, which cannot be substantiated, per se, by anyone other than yourself. Now if you'll excuse me, I'll have to ruin a per-fectly good thread by breaking the record, per your own account. ;)
That record is per your own count, which cannot be substantiated, per se, by anyone other than yourself. Now if you'll excuse me, I'll have to ruin a per-fectly good thread by breaking the record, per your own account. ;)
It doesn't count as the record if you're trying for the record. It has to come naturally.
aeromac76
01-02-06, 07:16 AM
It doesn't count as the record if you're trying for the record. It has to come naturally.
At 8:15 in the morning after a holiday break, this was pretty damned funny!! Thanks !!
:)
That said, Pavano indeed does have injury questions, his 2004 season was his only healthy one, but that also turned out ot be his best one.. Which means he can be looked at two ways..
1) He is a major injury waiting to happen
2) If healthy, he truly is a pretty good hurler
I would say both of those statements hold water to some degree. Should we trade him? Well, as always, that comes down to the simple case of whether or not we get a good deal for him. I don't necessarily mind paying some of his contract to get a guy like Brad Wilkerson if we can do it..
keithf1
01-04-06, 07:12 PM
Any word lately that we are pursuing Wilkerson or someone else that can play RF?
freebubba
01-05-06, 10:08 AM
Maybe not a bad idea... I would like to see Pavano come back and pitch well. I like to watch him pitch, he is an ornery, mean looking, cantankerous dude. However, we are also dealing with the spector of losing Sheff to FA after this year. He seems to be all about finishing his contract and then heading elsewhere. So Pavano + some bullpen guy for a Paul O'Neill type guy in right to eventually replace Sheff seems like a good move. Unfortunately, it ain't gonna happen. Unless, hmmmm, how many homeruns does Sheff hit in Arlington? Dumb thought, Sheff stirs the pot.
genius-24
01-05-06, 03:37 PM
First of all it will be REALLY hard to get wilkerson from the pitching we have...BUT...
How about this...
(Pavano/Wright)+Sturtz+(Proctor/Henn)=Kevin Mench+Juan Dominguez??
I think this is possible b/c Texas still doesnt have good pitching staff, and they might take their chances with healthy wright. Also they need help in BP. There they can use Sturtz as 7th inning guy,where he was successfull with the yankees in 2005's first half of the season, but after all star break he declined due to over use. Rest...I guess we can throw out mid level minor leagures to sure up the deal.
This will give us lot of depth in the OF, and this will allow sheff to play DH. We can have dominguez pitch in AAA in start of the season, and then let's wait and see what happen to our pitching staff and move on from there.
If this works out then we can sign tevarez or some one else with good BP track record to pitch primary or occasionally in 7th inning.
2006 Roster
SP-RJ, Pavano, Moose, Chacon, Wang.
BP-MO, Fransy, Tavarez*, Villone, Myers, Small.
Bench-Cairo, Bernie, Phillips, Bubba, Stinett.
LineUp-JD,DJ,A-Rod,Sheff,Giambi,Matsui,Mench/Posada,Posada/Mench, Cano.
If we want more action then...I think we can trade Bubba for Anything and allow kevin thompson and kevin reese to advance to ML.
Thoughts...
The FUTURE
01-05-06, 05:09 PM
I would love this....but no way texas would do this deal...end of story
genius-24
01-05-06, 07:10 PM
What stops them...$$$s?? Well, we can pay some of their salaries and pavano has showed he can pitch 200 innings and i think ppl know he can do better somewhere else.
Roberto Kelly
01-05-06, 07:59 PM
What stops them...$$$s?? Well, we can pay some of their salaries and pavano has showed he can pitch 200 innings and i think ppl know he can do better somewhere else.
I doubt that the somewhere would be Arlington.
MTYankee23
01-05-06, 08:26 PM
I doubt that the somewhere would be Arlington.
I'm sure there is a deal out there somewhere, but it may be more of a young player or prospect deal, as it may be tough to get a proven player for Pavano at this point. But there's nothing wrong with a Chris Snelling from Seattle or a young talented outfielder from one of the other teams.
Its unfortunate that to our knowledge Cleveland hasn't shown any interest in him, Coco Crisp wouldn't be a bad fit. But I think they're only interest in trading him was contingent on signing Nomar.
conkermaniac
01-06-06, 01:50 AM
Do you guys seriously think offense is that big a deal at this point?
Whoever they use, as long as he can catch and throw the ball will be good enough.
Funny how despite this, everyone thought it would be the end of the world if we started Crosby at CF.
freebubba
01-06-06, 08:38 AM
Conkermaniac-
I was having those same thoughts......
Honestly, our line-up and bench is fine. I agree that resigning Bernie may have been a great sentimental gesture, but was probably not the best move from a statistics vantage point. However, that does not mean it was a horrible one, either.
Unless someone appraoches us for a deal, keep the pitching, stand pat with the bench, and assess as the season progresses.
JeterRodriguezSheff
01-06-06, 08:30 PM
Conkermaniac-
I was having those same thoughts......
Honestly, our line-up and bench is fine. I agree that resigning Bernie may have been a great sentimental gesture, but was probably not the best move from a statistics vantage point. However, that does not mean it was a horrible one, either.
Unless someone appraoches us for a deal, keep the pitching, stand pat with the bench, and assess as the season progresses.
you try to make your team as best as possible. If you have an attrocious black hole in the line up and some bad defender and you can fix that by trading extra starters, you should.
Powered by vBulletin™ Version 4.0.7 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
0