Personally I think we are doing pretty well, at least much better than we used to in our development of players.
AND
I like Brian Cashman.
I am just sick and tired of checking in for news on International Signees, etc only to see additional conversation of, and, or about What's up doc front office hating. Some of you guys should be arrested as terrorist for hijacking and animal cruelty.
So can we keep it all here and I promise I'll check in from time to time to see how bad it TRULY is?
WARNING! This post may be offensive to little girly men or women with soft feelings.
Never argue with an idiot. They'll bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.
In before the doc.
Hiyooooooooooo
Calmer than you are.
thank you budstinks. Hopefully, this thread will be for what's up doc to what's up doc, and other threads will finally have news, updates and more pointed discussion.
Congratulations and thank you for number 27, Yankees !!!!!!!!!!!!!. 1 game at a time to 28. C'mon, Yankees.
That's pretty sexy, in a I'm-tired of-nonsense-in-this-forum kind of way. That came out weird.Originally Posted by yarosh25
too bad there is pretty much no real news right now.
Why do we feed the troll?
I'd think you'd be greatful for the deflection, as '09 was futher proof of just how quickly Cashman's devotion to player development has wained. The biggest news was for those that got away to the small market teams.
So which is it? Doing pretty well or at least better than before? Because they are worlds apart. The embarassing early to mid '00's is a patheticly low bar setting for comparison. And if the Yankees are doing the ambiguous pretty good, is that good enough by your standards? When the major league team is doing pretty good, is that OK too?
This team has, by far, the largest revenue stream in all of professional sports. "For those whom much is given, much is expected."
For most of the George Stienbrenner years, the crazy level of expenditures have been a case study of how not to run a pro franchise. The great exception to the rule was the special run of '96 to 2001. And that was only make possible by George's banning, which allowed for real baseball people to operate without the impatient, impulsive owners short horizon, ill-fated meddlings. This last WS victory is still do largely to those far reaching, developmental in-roads paved by the Stienbrenner-less years.
Now the biggest buz surrounding the farm system is the front office lip service and the fans who choose to play along with canned excitement.
Beyond Montero (someone I highly doubt that the Yankees would have signed in the present market climate) the upper level of the system is filled with second division role players. The lower system is not in much better shape, with 2 to 3 high ceiling types and the realities of low level attrition.
It's going to create the same vicious cycle that has plagued the Yankees for most of the Stienbrenner years. Needing to spend absurd amounts of money to over-pay aging veterans in free agency and having to trade most of what remains of the real prospects in hopes of staying on top. It leads to a ton of bad money being spent on immoveable contracts and little relief in terms of fresh blood within the system. The perverbial dog chasing it's tale.
And I'm not saying the Yankees shouldn't spend big-time on free agents. With the ever escalating costs of being a Yankees fan I expect it. But, do it wisely, for maximum effect. Don't trade Hughes for Santana, keep him and add Sabbathia one short year later. Sign a FA SP or two to an incentive filled contract this year and sign a prime aged, impact FA pitcher to team with CC as the best 1-2 in baseball next year. And I still got the under valued ceiling of Vizcaino as a big chip in acquiring H. Ramirez or to await another young wave-- sure sounds better to my ears when you team the big time stuff of Vizcaino with the lefthanded, no. 3 ceiling potential of Man Ban as 1, 2 punch. Feel the same way about signing a M. Byrd for CF and having enough money left to upgrade LF thus getting better overall, shortterm results than with CF Granderson and LF Gardener (of the this year's retread equivalent) AND retaining Jackson for the near future. Without Granderson's salary I can sign a FA of his calabre AND have the young, athletic, and inexpensive Jackson as an ever improving contibuter.
Now go ahead and convince me of how irrational my way of thinking is. Or how good the farm system is.
And no, I won't be buy into it. As always, I feel like Winston Churchill in a room full of Neville Chamberlains.
Is there some corollary to Godwin's Law that covers Neville Chamberlain?
Seeing this thread made me think of this.
The first rule is to never acknowledge the troll or give them special attention. Once you acknowledge the troll, they'll stay and keep feeding until they grow so fat they consume the entire board. The only way to rid yourself of the troll, and restore sanity to the board, is to ignore them. Yes, it can be quite hard not to respond to their lunacy. They are just begging you to confront them and tell them how wrong they are. So they can respond and continue their feeding. But once they see everyone is ignoring them, the hungry troll will move away.
Bud deserves better than that.
Denial is a happy place.
Tiger Woods:Sent: 01:28 PM 09/08/2009:
Have you ever had a golden shower done to you
As I stated in the other thread, I believe "Whats up Doc" overstates the problems with Yankee Player development. He is not giving the team enough credit for Cano, Joba, Hughes, Robertson, Melky, etc. etc. However, there are elements of truth in what he's saying. For example, I am in total agreement with him that the Yankees have not taken full advantage of the system which allows IFA to bypass the draft and sign with any team. Also, its hard to deny that the young Steinbrenners are tightening the purse strings. Would the old man have allowed the Reds to outbid us for Chapman or the A's to outbid us for Iona? Would the old man let Damon walk for the 5 to 8 million it would take to sign him? The reality is that 2 years ago Hank Steinbrenner talked about hoarding prospects and it hasn't happened. With their resources the Yankees should be doing a much better job of player development. I believe most objective fans would agree with that statement.
I think most here would agree with your post. I'm disappointed we aren't hoarding prospects like hankie boy said we would.
I'm disappointed we don't take MORE advantage than what we do with the IFA. Although blowing the kind of money it took for Chapman or Iona isn't necessarily what I have in mind. I'd like to take advantage of the $500k to $1 mil type players and offer 50% more.
At the same time, I'm not so much a hater that I can't admit that there has been improvement, that drafting where we draft denies us a chance at the better prospects and that the past years lack of aggressiveness had more with going over budget on Tex than it does with Yankee cheapness.
WARNING! This post may be offensive to little girly men or women with soft feelings.
Never argue with an idiot. They'll bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.
The mere fact that this guy believes Marlon Byrd is the answer in CF renders every other statement he makes pointless.
Woo lets sign players coming back from injury and count on them to throw 200+ innings..... This plan worked out for the Red-Sox last year no? (Penny, Smoltz, ETC..)
Lets sign one of these stud SP this upcoming off-season......OK Captain obvious, Andy + Vazquez = 25million off the books = DEFINITE signings
Trade for Hanley Ramirez? Not possible.
Not trade for Granderson? WOW Jackson is young and athletic....He will still be below average regular in CF givin the chance to play everyday. His ceiling is below Granderson's who is in his peak years and cost controlled for then next 3 years....
Comeon man, just go to a Red Sox board already
The problem with not signing more IFAs is that Yankees just changed top executives oversees, specifically Carlos Rios, and it takes time to establish new contacts/connections with agents, handlers, etc and not jmp cold turkey into the market without knowing who the real players are, which agents overhype their prospects by a mile, who is willing to go extra distance to get paid (for example changing birth certificates, PEDs to ttheir players). Otherwise there could be pretty costly mistakes that could turn ownership completely away from that region as a bad investment area.
Congratulations and thank you for number 27, Yankees !!!!!!!!!!!!!. 1 game at a time to 28. C'mon, Yankees.
Kick, punch, block.
Did everyone conveniently forget the elephant in the middle of the room? Who do you think is paying for that $1B new Stadium?
That's right- the Yankees are on the hook for at least several hundred million dollars, and maybe as much as half a billion dollars.
When the Yanks were in the old Stadium, it had been paid for so long ago that the Yanks didn't need to account for much more than upgrades and maintenance costs. That has all changed. If you have ever owned a house, you know that the banks aren't simply going to give you a backloaded payment schedule. They want their money back, with interest, quickly.
In short, this criticism of Hal and Cashman is foolish on a number of levels. First, the statement about blowing away the other teams came from HANK, who has little role in the running of the team- simply because HAL controls the money. Second, because Hal is in control of the money, he has to make sure the Yanks make their Stadium payments in addition to the payroll and other costs.
Remember that the Yanks have not cut their payroll significantly over the past several years. Instead, they have kept the payroll around $200M. Keep in mind that the Yanks have other costs- coaches, employees, benefits payments, draft picks, IFA signings, and all the other costs associated with running a business.
Now, it is true that the Yanks have raised prices on tickets, parking and other costs- but keep in mind that these are not "new" sources of revenue- these are just increases on the existing sources. That means that despite rising gross revenue numbers, you must also account for the significiant increases in costs (the Stadium payments).
In short, as Yankee fans, we should consider ourselves EXTREMELY fortunate that Hal has maintained payroll, likely at the cost of owner profits and other costs in the organization. However, one of those costs is probably the draft and IFA budget. Yankee fans should be happy that the budget for the draft and IFA is as high as it is- the Steinbrenners have never been shy about ploughing profits back into the team- but given the financial realities of the past couple years, the Yanks have done everything they can to maintain the quality of the ML product- while paying for the new Stadium.
While lazy sportswriters and talk radio hosts loved to show the empty luxury seats at the Stadium and talk about greed- Yankee fans should have been incensed. Those empty seats meant lost profits- which in turn meant that that was a future opportunity lost, because the next budget would be that much smaller- and cuts would be made somewhere.
In short, next time you think the Yanks have an un limited budget, go down and visit the new Stadium, and thank the Yanks for making sure you have a front office and ownership that isn't skimping on the on-field product for that new Stadium- and think about what is likely being sacrificed for those payments.
There is an argument to be made that perhaps the Yanks should not have gone for the over-the-top Stadium- but those decisions were made in a different financial time, with different finacial realities. No one expected or foresaw the Recession coming- and for the Yanks, it simply happened at the worst possible time with the new Stadium opening- and the resultant loss in revenue for the empty high end seats.
The Yanks still make their big splashes in the IFA market and the draft- but the bluster of Hank will never happen, as long as the Yanks have principal and interest payments to make on the new Stadium.
"In short"
You are obviously a highly intelligent, independent thinker with his finger in the dam. Emphasing the highly intelligent, independent thinker part.
1) I said that by signing Byrd and still having money let over when compared to Granderson's contract would allow you to upgrade over Gardener in LF and have better overall production AND you get to keep Jackson who's cost controlled for six years and projected to get better. Somehow Jackson's ceiling dropped a lot since the trade. So, in the big picture, yes, an answer.
2) Granderson's splits stink and he doesn't profile as a player who will age well.
3) Vazquez had a career year and will not come close to repeating it in the AL East. Cashman payed too much (by including Vizcaino) too early in the prossess.
4) Sheets and Bedard could have been had for near the same cost with loads of incentives added on. No more of a gamble that one of them will come through in the 2nd half bigger than Vazquez and pitch better in the real Yankee's season that counts....the playoffs. And my way, they only risk money. If both the RH'er and the LH'er pay off, WOW. The upside is actually greater and the downside doesn't include losing a potential farm produced ace. It's not the number of innings with CC, Burnett, and Andy on board as much quality of and importance of those innings.
5) H. Ramirez is an example of a player I would package my no. 2 and no. 3 prospects (and others) for. Likely to come available and if he does, the forethought would allow me to have the propects spent for Granderson and a one year rental to land a true Yankee-esque magnitude star. Still young enough to team with Montero and a few of the LA FA stars that got away to start another really special run.
6) Granderson's cost controlled? I think they call that a guaranteed multi-million dollar, multi-year contract. Yankee's got lots of those. By your definition guaranteed and cost control are one and the same. Spoken like a true Steinbrenner supporter. They can't tell the difference, either.
7) Why don't you and Cashman go to the Red Sox board and allow for a much needed fresh approach here.
$Ardolis$ meet Dusty "Arm Grinder" Baker.
No, it really doesn't. It's called going over-slot. Players with high ceilings drop every year. You have to plan the budget to go after them and mean it. Bud Selig can't do anything with real consequences to stop it.
You've gone off the deep end.
Calmer than you are.
You rail on Granderson's poor splits (when his splits against pitchers he'll face 75% of the time are excellent) and then go onto ignore the fact that Byrd is a product of Arlington (.900 OPS at Home/.742 Away)
Jackson was a good, but flawed prospect. But yea, Yankee fans only began saying such things after the trade.
No one is asking him to repeat, his FIP with Chicago should be an indicator of what to expect.3) Vazquez had a career year and will not come close to repeating it in the AL East. Cashman payed too much (by including Vizcaino) too early in the prossess.
Take a gamble on Sheets and Bedard so that when their arms fall off mid-April you can rant like a petulant child about how wrong Cashman was?4) Sheets and Bedard could have been had for near the same cost with loads of incentives added on. No more of a gamble that one of them will come through in the 2nd half bigger than Vazquez and pitch better in the real Yankee's season that counts....the playoffs. And my way, they only risk money. If both the RH'er and the LH'er pay off, WOW. The upside is actually greater and the downside doesn't include losing a potential farm produced ace. It's not the number of innings with CC, Burnett, and Andy on board as much quality of and importance of those innings.
Bad troll is bad.
Tiger Woods:Sent: 01:28 PM 09/08/2009:
Have you ever had a golden shower done to you
I agree with what has been stated here. I think that the picture isn't quite as bleak as it is being portrayed by 'What's Up Doc', but it certainly isn't all roses either. The lack of positional prospects at the top of the system, aside from Montero and potenitally Romine, is alarming. The high level of injuries to the few exciting upper level starting pitchers is also alarming. However, there is talent in the system, especially in the lower levels. Not enough credit is being given for Wang, Cano, Melky, nor is enough credit being given for Hughes, Joba, Gardner, Melancon, Robertson, McAllister and others as draftees (even though most are from the 2006 draft). The last 3-4 drafts have been fairly strong, though I think there are some picks that everyone would have liked to have been different, though I am sure that is true in hindsight with all team's drafts. I think the past couple of years have been run with a good balance of trades, free agent signings and development of young players, though I will say that none of the young players appear to be headed for stardom, with the exception of Cano and potential of Montero (though Hughes and Joba could apply here as well, if they ever get the chance to start full time and can handle it).
That being said, some of the things mentioned do at least cause me to pause and think. What if we signed Byrd and Damon for CF and LF instead of trading for Granderson? Would we be better off? True Damon is older and Byrd has flaws, but both outperformed Grandy last year and we would still have Jackson in the wings, as well as Gardner. If Grandy reverts back to 2007/2008 form, we are fine. If not, well, it may not be pretty. Another factor is that Gardner and Grandy are much younger than Damon and Byrd and Byrd hasn't had a season of offensive success outside of Texas, so that needs to be considered as well.
Another interesting thing to consider is, would we be better off with Sheets/Bedard and Vizcaino or Vazquez? Vazquez had mixed results the first time around and the cost of him in a trade was high. He likely will be gone after 2010 anyway, with a FA starter (can you say Cliff Lee?) in his place. Would we be better off rolling the dice on one of the injured guys and keeping the young arm? I kind of feel like we are rolling the dice anyway.
I realize that the farm system has many uses and it isn't solely responsible for stocking the major league level with players. Some guys are redundant and can be used to fill holes or areas of need, which is what was attempted here. I can't fault the attempted effort to get better and younger, but the path taken certainly can be debated. The game of what if can be played, as long as you don't get too extreme about it. We can't get all the best young players, nor can we draft all the high ceiling signability cases, nor can we develop a full team of homegrown players. We just have to hope that the best decisions possible are made. So far, things haven't turned out too bad.
With most of our marquee players on the back end of their careers, the front office would do the fans and themselves a disservice by letting the farm system lapse into mediocrity. What's Up Doc is in my opiniojn, spot on. Interesting that the Yankees brought in Livesey last year. Was it to shore up problems within the scouting department, or is Oppenheimer overrated? We shall see.
So long as we're trading for young players, cost controlled players and/or players that will return picks like Vazquez, I don't have a real problem with it.
It's the 34 year olds coming off career years that I want to stay away from. Trading a prospected like Jackson for a 28 year old all star like Granderson is fine by me.
You guys need to keep in mind that we're the Yankees. There is no room for a 75 OPS+ hitter in our lineup. Our #9 hitter had a 99 OPS+ and he got traded. Our current #9 hitter plays ++ defense in a prime position, steals a lot of bases and had a 93 OPS+. People are still screaming for an upgrade.
Keep the ones that project to be something good. Spin the rest off for something that is good. The 200 million dollar pay roll fills in the rest.
A fool and his money can throw one heck of a party!
This is a dramatic overstatement.
Posada is clearly on his last Yankee contract- but the Yanks appear to be covered between Montero and Romine. Both are VERY young (early 20s)
Jeter is not going to be a SS much longer (though he can move to the OF and add a few useful years to his career). Keep in mind that while this is a tough fix, watch what happens with Hanley Ramirez- his contract begins to get VERY large (up to 1/3 of the Marlins projected payroll) by 2011. The Yanks might be in a position to make a move after this season. HRam is in his mid 20's.
Mo is aging- despite what the ostrichs here say- but Joba is a quite acceptable alternative- and in his mid 20's.
ARod is 33- he did respond well after the hip surgery, and will now be forced to take the extra measures to keep himself in peak condition. The DH spot will be his in 2-3 years, but he will still be among MLB's elite for some time.
Tex is 30- not an issue.
Cano is in his 20's- not an issue.
Granderson is in his 20's- not an issue.
Swisher turns 30 this coming November- not an issue.
Gardner, assuming he is the LF, is in his 20's- not an issue.
The pitching:
This is likely Pettitte's last season. He's a #3 SP who is older and did have arm surgery 3 years ago. However, no apparent problems since. He will likely be told that his time in NY is up after this season, as the Yanks will chase the big FA SP in the off-season.
CC turns 30 in July- not an issue.
AJ turned 33 in January- that's borderline age- he has had durability problems in the past- but has put together 2 full seasons in a row. Some concern, but not high concern.
Vasquez is 34- but has been VERY durable for years- hasn't made less than 32 starts since 1999. Not much concern as he is a FA this winter.
Hughes and Joba- early 20's- not an issue.
Rest of Yankees bullpen not named Mo or Marter- all in 20's no issues. Marte is 35, but is a bit player in the pen- might not be more than a situational lefty.
In short, saying that the Yanks "core" is old is REALLY stretching the truth.
Jeter, Posada, Pettitte, and Mo are significantly older. However, viable existing alternatives for Mo and Posada exist already. Pettitte and Vasquez are VERY likely to be replaced in FA next offseason (pick 2 from Lilly, Lee, Webb and others).
That just leaves the Yanks without a viable existing Jeter alternative (no, Pena will not be the answer). That means a hard decision must be made after this season- btu the Yanks have the resources to make whatever trade is necessary.
Let's stop being a bunch of Nancies and think first.
This is, I believe, called the Epstein strategy. Smoltz and Penny suggest it doesn't always work out.
"Trade a player a year too early rather than a year too late" -- Branch Rickey
Penny wasn't good enough and a 41 year old coming off shoulder surgery was just an outright stupid move for the AL East.
Sheets is much much much better gamble.
A fool and his money can throw one heck of a party!
Sheets hasn't pitched in a whole freaking year. and was never the picture of health to begin with. could he be worth a gamble? sure, but it's still a gamble, and if you lose the gamble your left with a gaping hole in the rotation.
Just watch the Mets implode next year with their rotation. and more of it will be due to lack of innings than actual lack of good pitching.
If I'm a team not named a Florida Marlins (aka not a cheap shot a-hole team who's operating with the only intention of rigging revenue sharing dollars) that have a Hanley Ramirez, I would not trade him for anything short of 2 A propsect and a couple of Bs, looking at John Sickle's current list, there is exactly 2 teams in the majors that have 3 A prospects. (Rangers and Rays)5) H. Ramirez is an example of a player I would package my no. 2 and no. 3 prospects (and others) for. Likely to come available and if he does, the forethought would allow me to have the propects spent for Granderson and a one year rental to land a true Yankee-esque magnitude star. Still young enough to team with Montero and a few of the LA FA stars that got away to start another really special run.
If you think offering Vizcaino + Jackson (plus any other prospects not named Montero) = Hanley Ramirez, I think you have no clue on values in baseball. in fact, even if you trade the entire Yankee system top 10 prior to those two deals, it would not come close to netting Hanely Ramirez.
Of course, being the Marlins, they probably end up trading Hanely for less, but even then, the Yankee farm system is highly unlikely to be able to compete with other teams.
The closest comparable was the Ricky Henderson trade, but back then the Yankees had Jose Rijo, who was the best pitching prospect in baseball. (and would turn out to be a very good pitcher, maybe even a HOF pitcher if injuries hadn't derail him) Eric Plunk (who had a very nice year in A ball that year, and would turn in a reasonablly good career as a reliever) Stan Javier (who was kinda like Melky Cabrera of the day, turned in a long solid career mostly as a 4th OF) Jay Howell ( another useful reliever, though he was more of a known quality by then) and Tim Birtas (who had massive tools as a 6'7 240 lefty, he didn't turn out that well but as a prospect he was pretty good).
To compare, I would have rated Rijos a strait A and probably the best prospect in baseball at that point, Plunk a B+ , Javier and Birtas somewhere in the B range. and most people considered that trade a true high way robbery . even when the Yankees sat on their couches after their worest season in franchise history while Jose Rijo dominate game 1 and 4 of the 1990 WS.
even if the Marlins were forced by financial trouble, that above list is probably the abosalute minimum of what it would take to get Ramirez, which si certainly WELL above your supposed Vizcaino + Jackson theory . try Montero (rough equivalent to Rijo ) + Vizcaino (who's somewhat comparable to Plunk) Jackson (Javier) and a healthier version of Brackman / Betances . along with ... oh say a Brian Bruney (before he was traded)
http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/ar...s-of-all-time/
So again, once you bring up the #2+#3 guy for Han-Ram, you lose all credibility. because if anything, the abosalute minimum it would take for a Han Ram is more like #1-#4 .the Yankees eventually pried Henderson from the A's by giving up four of their top five prospects (ranked by Baseball America) at the time.
FOR TAIWAN!
I don't even know where to start with this thread?
By the time the Marlins trade Hanley, a package of Austin Romine, Slade Heathcott, Kelvin DeLeon, Manny Banuelos and Jose Rameriz could easily get it done.
I think the Yankee system will look a lot better in a year or so once some of the younger investments hit the full season leagues. Or it could look worse if a lot of the younger players bust.
Either way, I think the Yanks have plenty of talent working it's way up to trade for just about any player. Especially in a year or so.
WARNING! This post may be offensive to little girly men or women with soft feelings.
Never argue with an idiot. They'll bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.
Sure, if you have a crystal ball into the future. and if they do develope like that you'd probably won't view them in the same light as you would now. I do agree that the Yankee system have improved in terms of depth, they do a good job drafting (relative to their limited draft slots) and IFA, but for the purpose of this current point in time, the Yankees have one great prospect, about 3 guys who are solid but still have various degree of questions. and a lot of maybes. that isn't a currenlty strong system, it MIGHT be better in a year or 2, but it ISN'T good.I don't even know where to start with this thread?
By the time the Marlins trade Hanley, a package of Austin Romine, Slade Heathcott, Kelvin DeLeon, Manny Banuelos and Jose Rameriz could easily get it done.
I think the Yankee system will look a lot better in a year or so once some of the younger investments hit the full season leagues. Or it could look worse if a lot of the younger players bust.
Either way, I think the Yanks have plenty of talent working it's way up to trade for just about any player. Especially in a year or so.
FOR TAIWAN!
I am inclined to agree with your analysis for the future potential of the system, especially with these young guys you have mentioned, as well as some others, hopefully staying healthy and developing to their full potential. With further advancement of these 5, plus say Brackman, Betances, Murphy, Paredes (who I personally love as a prospect), Suttle, and a few others, I think the Yankees will have a dynamite system. However, at this point, it is all projection.I don't even know where to start with this thread?
By the time the Marlins trade Hanley, a package of Austin Romine, Slade Heathcott, Kelvin DeLeon, Manny Banuelos and Jose Rameriz could easily get it done.
I think the Yankee system will look a lot better in a year or so once some of the younger investments hit the full season leagues. Or it could look worse if a lot of the younger players bust.
Either way, I think the Yanks have plenty of talent working it's way up to trade for just about any player. Especially in a year or so.
Assuming that these guys do develop as hoped and achieve their full potential, would we really be willing to do that trade? I would think that a potential starting Catcher, CF, corner OF, #2 pitcher and #3 pitcher would be more attractive to keep as Yankees than to shuttle them off for one player, even if he is a potential future HOF Shortstop. I think I would pass on that trade, considering all the factors, including the cost of keeping Ramirez as a Yankee long term (which will be considerable for sure), but I am curious what others think.
Yes you would, unless you are very very sure that you have on hand a HOF talent yourself (and really the only guy who can even remotely make that claim now is Montero, and even then you'd seriously weigh the odds and value of a guy who is more likely to turn into a DH than C), you would always trade away any number of prospects for a SS in his 20s who looks like he's well on his way to a inner circle HOF track. espeically when your the yankees and filling out other holes isn't a serious challenge.
FOR TAIWAN!
None of us really knows this, do we? We haven't seen his medicals, and his track record doesn't suggest he'll pitch a full season
"Trade a player a year too early rather than a year too late" -- Branch Rickey
This thread is nucking futz.
Calmer than you are.
Assuming he's healthy on opening day, of course.
A fool and his money can throw one heck of a party!
I can't believe this guy is complaining about the Granderson and Vasquez deal. I mean I could see if we gave up Montero for Halladay, but these prospects aren't blue-chip top prospects. Jackson value as a prospect has fallen over the past 2 years and wasn't improving at certain areas of his game that the Yankees wanted to see improvement in. And you're going to criticize a deal that got the Yankees a top 4 Cy Young candidate in the NL because of an 18 year old pitcher who's at the very least 3 years away from the majors?
That has to be a joke, right? Not to mention by the time those 2 players (if they even pan out) contribute to this team, we will be seeing less production from our core players (A-Rod, Jeter, Riveria, Posada).
Hughes Joba Montero= The Future
Dramatic overstatement.....mentions a 2B who is entering his late 20's and a CF who turns 30 this year. A young bullpen. Oh, lets not forget to throw in Gardener (who's status on the depth charts should be an inditement of the system.) Every other name mentioned is on the wrong side of thirty.
Truly core worthy, elite players extend their prime years. Swisher, for one, is already well into a downward slide, Granderson has just begun his. 34 is right at the age where pitchers with the mileage and make up of Vazquez begin their decline/injury phase. Ditto for Burnett and soon to follow, Sabbathia.
Wow, that's some kind of case to be made.
And the only thing being stretched is players being deemed as a part of the core.
Everything in the Marlins history points to them eventually trading Ramirez-- not a bad thing to plan ahead for with a 36 year old SS with the range of an ocean liner and absolutely nothing in the syystem that even hints at starter potential at the position. And the pool of teams willing to take on the contract demands will be limited but, I doubt limited to your two. Don't think the Marlins will be consulting you and that Sickles scalewhen the time comes.
Plunk, considered a limited arsenal, relief specialist, even at the time of the trade comparable to Vizcaino, at the time of his trade-- and I'm the one with credibility issues
Try working on your reading skills before tackling theories. I said VIZCAINO, JACKSON AND OTHERS AS PART OF A PACKAGE FOR RAMIREZ.
The joke is how 2 marginal prospects were rated in the top 5 of the Yankee system and yet player development is doing just dandy.
No, I won't bother to argue with you about the pitcher who finished last year as a top 4 NL Cy Young candidate, I'll let this years preformance do the speaking for me.
And just as all the Jackson supporters on this site vanished over night, watch and see how all the support for this trade disappears just as fast.
OK, so 34 year olds is where you draw the line? Not with 33 year olds having career years.
Yeah, we're the Yankees and the roster needs to be filled with a pathwork of expensive, veterans predictably trending towards over-payed, decline years. How else would Yankee fans appreciate the championship teams, where player development played the leading role, if we didn't have long stretches of hamstung payrolls and it's limiting effects on both the standings and the farm.
His track record indicates he won't pitch a full season but, it also indicates he will pitch effectively when he does.
Everything in the Marlins history points to them eventually trading Ramirez-- not a bad thing to plan ahead for with a 36 year old SS with the range of an ocean liner and absolutely nothing in the syystem that even hints at starter potential at the position. And the pool of teams willing to take on the contract demands will be limited but, I doubt limited to your two. Don't think the Marlins will be consulting you and that Sickles scale
Plunk, considered a limited arsenal, relief specialist, even at the time of the trade comparable to Vizcaino, at the time of his trade-- and I'm the one with credibility issues
Try working on your reading skills before tackling theories. I said VIZCAINO, JACKSON AND OTHERS AS PART OF A PACKAGE FOR RAMIREZ.
And who's your others? assuming we're not talking Montero here?
Your assuming that Vizcaino will continue to progress in the next 1 or 2 year. which is always a big IF when we're talking about A. teenagers B. pitchers C. guys that havn't even played full season. and Arody is all of the above.
I'm not very optimisitic on Jackson, if we go purely by the Stats (and really, it's AAA, time to show the good ) he aint even gonna be Melky Cabrera, but if we believe in his tools then maybe he could be better... but it is unlikely to be by a significant margin.
The Yankees have significant depth that MAYBE someone will emerge and be very valuable in the next year or two, but note the maybe here. last year at this time most people thought the biggest sleeper pitchers in the system (i.e, on the verge of a breakout) were Betances / Heredia / De La Rosa. that really turned out well didn't it, two got hurt, and most are almost ready to throw the bust lable on Dellin, where as De La Rosa had a decent but not exactly break out year (too many walks, not enough innings).
Not to meantion that non of thse address the point, we're not competing for 2012, we're competing for 2010 here. Granderson and Vazquez are significant upgrades over just about anything you could reasonablly get on the FA market. (minus magic healing water for Sheets and Bedard)
Dramatic overstatement.....mentions a 2B who is entering his late 20's and a CF who turns 30 this year. A young bullpen. Oh, lets not forget to throw in Gardener (who's status on the depth charts should be an inditement of the system.) Every other name mentioned is on the wrong side of thirty.
Truly core worthy, elite players extend their prime years. Swisher, for one, is already well into a downward slide, Granderson has just begun his. 34 is right at the age where pitchers with the mileage and make up of Vazquez begin their decline/injury phase. Ditto for Burnett and soon to follow, Sabbathia.
Wow, that's some kind of case to be made.
And the only thing being stretched is players being deemed as a part of the coreDramatic overstatement.....mentions a 2B who is entering his late 20's and a CF who turns 30 this year. A young bullpen. Oh, lets not forget to throw in Gardener (who's status on the depth charts should be an inditement of the system.) Every other name mentioned is on the wrong side of thirty.
Truly core worthy, elite players extend their prime years. Swisher, for one, is already well into a downward slide, Granderson has just begun his. 34 is right at the age where pitchers with the mileage and make up of Vazquez begin their decline/injury phase. Ditto for Burnett and soon to follow, Sabbathia.
Wow, that's some kind of case to be made.
And the only thing being stretched is players being deemed as a part of the core.
Robinson Cano seasonal age for 2010 = 27
Average age of AL batters in 2009 = 29.0
Yankees batter age for 2009 = 30.5
Youngest team average batter age for 2009 = 27.4
Nick Swisher career best OPS+ (pre 2009) 126
Nick Swisher OPS+ in 2009 : 129
Nick Swisher career best WAR (pre 2009) 3.6
Nick Swisher WAR in 2009: 3.5
Granderson in the present tense now might make it a reasonable statement, sort of like the same statement made on Cano and Swisher this time last year. there are signs that you can look at if a guy is truly declining in skills or is it simply a tough luck / normal flucation year. Granderson's # seem to point to the later (BABIP .05 points lower than career, not very significant flucation in K rate, line drive rate etc). but I will reserve judgement until the season suffice to say that right now , it is a questionable call. he could be declining but he could just as well bounce back. and if I'm a gambling man I'd certainly bet on the later.
But of course, going by the logic that Nick Swisher's 2009 (which was actually his career year) = steep decline, I can see how a 100 win Yankee team = suck
FOR TAIWAN!
Wam Bam Slam, Its Over Maam
I think Hal and Cash are smarter than most of us. Get the payroll under control this year, Major money comes off the books next year, (Igawa, Pettite, Vazquez, Jeter) I don't think Jeter signs again for 20m, A three year deal for 45m sounds about right (i jusdt wishing on this). Sign Carl Crawford to play left and the lefty from seattle and bring up either Nova or Bleich tp be the 5th starter and the world is right again
Jeter isn't going to get $20mil again? Speculation at this point is he will very likely get just that much, if not more for his next deal. Just last week on MLB Network, Jon Heyman speculated a deal of 3 years, $75mil for Jeter. The avg annual salary sounds about right, but it may be for 4-5 years. That being said, whatever it costs the Yankees will pay. He is approaching (fast) 3,000 hits and seems to be at the top of his game, even at 35/36 years old. In early 2012 he should reach 3,000 hits, which would be a first for a career Yankee.
So, Jeter isn't coming off the books and Igawa technically isn't on them. I can't see Crawford coming to NY, as I agree that Lee will be a target and will be very expensive. My guess would be that a LF will be targeted, but not sure who. Also, I doubt that Bleich or Nova wwill be the 5th starter, since Joba and Hughes are better.
Heyman's insane. His AAV for his last deal was 18.9. He's not getting a higher AAV on his next deal. That doesn't make sense, since he's not the same player.
I wouldn't be surprised at all if DJ gets 3/60 or 4/80. You shouldn't be either. It's going to happen.
How does this make sense to anyone? He got a monster deal when he was 26 and entering his prime in an outstanding market. He's not the same player anymore. Why would he get a higher AAV?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
