• Let’s B-Real On A-Rod Deal

    Posted by on October 17th, 2006 · Comments (15)

    When the Yankees acquired Alex Rodriguez (and money) from the Texas Rangers back in February 2004, New York lost Alfonso Soriano and minor leaguer Joaquin Arias in the trade.

    At the time, Arias was a prospect – but not a blue-chipper. Soriano, then 28-years-old, was an All-Star type player albeit with some holes in his game.

    Therefore, if the Yankees were to now trade A-Rod, I suggest that it would only be reasonable to expect something like the package of Soriano & Arias in return – and, actually, maybe something a little less considering that the Yankees will not be off-setting Rodriguez’ pay (like the Rangers did when they threw money into the 2004 trade).

    Yes, I’m saying – should the Yankees trade Alex Rodriguez this winter – that Yankees fans should be happy if New York gets two players in return: One player at or near All-Star status who can help the team at the major league level in 2007 and one minor league Grade-B prospect.

    If the Yankees can get this package, and find a team willing to take on A-Rod’s contract, as well as the new team being a franchise that Alex would accept, then it’s O.K. to pull the trigger.

    Making trades is all about having leverage. The Yankees do not have huge leverage in shopping A-Rod. There are only a few teams that can afford him and only a sub-set of those teams which Alex would accept in a trade. If the Yankees can strike a deal with one of those few teams in that “sub-set” and they can get that major-league ready player to help next season and a prospect as well, I can live with that deal.

    To expect anything more than that would be ignoring the facts that are in play with this situation.

    Comments on Let’s B-Real On A-Rod Deal

    1. Raf
      October 17th, 2006 | 2:00 pm

      The Yankees do not have huge leverage in shopping A-Rod. There are only a few teams that can afford him and only a sub-set of those teams which Alex would accept in a trade.
      =======
      You also forgot to mention that the Yanks don’t have to move him. I’m sure Cashman will entertain offers, but trading Rodriguez isn’t that high a priority.

    2. baileywalk
      October 17th, 2006 | 2:00 pm

      I disagree with you, Steve. Considering what Soriano was capable of (he was a perennial 30-30 guy who nearly went 40-40) and that the Rangers were DESPERATE to rid themselves of A-Rod’s contract, the Rangers did well in the A-Rod trade.

      This time around it’s different. The Yankees have AT LEAST three teams they know can take on A-Rod’s contract — the Cubs, Dodgers and Angels (and probably the White Sox and some other teams, though I don’t think they’re really in on this). Unlike the Rangers, they Yankees don’t have to move A-Rod. Keeping him on the team won’t hurt them. As long as they get some pitching (Matsuzaka, Hughes) the Yankees will be in good shape. The Yankees have ALL the leverage here — either the team gives them what they want or they don’t get A-Rod. There’s no harm in keeping him.

      The Dodgers, Cubs or Angels will have to give up a minimum of three blue-chip prospects. Prospects haven’t shown what they can do yet, so there’s a potential for disappointment. With Sori, you knew what he could do (as proven on the big-league level). Both the Cubs and Dodgers have two good pitchers to offer and each has a third basemen to offer, too.

      The Yankees should demand those players — prospects who are ready or near ready, and won’t cost a thing — and if they don’t get them, tell the teams to eff off.

      Since Cashman is running the team, we will get the best deal out there or just keep A-Rod for another year.

    3. October 17th, 2006 | 2:48 pm

      If the Yanks start up a bidding war for A-Rod, they could clean house. If both the LA teams are serious about getting him, they will do their best to win the media war and make the big move.

      When A-Rod was dealt to the Yanks, the deal that would have sent him to Boston had just fell through, so the Yanks didn’t have much competition in acquiring A-Rod. Joaquin Arias was a bit more than a B-prospect at the time, but he was clearly the best of the five guys Texas was able to choose from at the time. If the Rangers could do it over, they’d obviously take Cano now.

      Cash could use the fact that the Yanks don’t have to deal A-Rod to his advantage and drive up the price.

    4. October 17th, 2006 | 3:05 pm

      ~~~Unlike the Rangers, they Yankees don’t have to move A-Rod. Keeping him on the team won’t hurt them.~~~

      Talk to Torre about that one.

    5. Raf
      October 17th, 2006 | 3:19 pm

      ~~~Unlike the Rangers, they Yankees don’t have to move A-Rod. Keeping him on the team won’t hurt them.~~~

      Talk to Torre about that one.
      ========
      The Yanks won 101, 95 and 97 games while he was here, so if he had an adverse effect on the team, they had a funny way of showing it.

    6. JeremyM
      October 17th, 2006 | 3:20 pm

      I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, if Torre can’t work with A-Rod then Torre is the problem here. I know people like to brag about his “people skills,” but the guy has been managing people like Jeter, Bernie, Cone, Tino, etc. etc. Those guys can manage themselves. The game is filled with tough-to-deal-with superstars: DiMaggio, Williams, and Ruth for starters, and I would wager that A-Rod is easier to deal with then all of them.

    7. christopher
      October 17th, 2006 | 3:23 pm

      Regardless of what Torre wants, the Yanks have 100% of the leverage. ARod has publicly stated that he won’t accept a trade, Cashman has publicly stated that he doesn’t want to trade ARod, and several teams have stated that they would love to have ARod. Can’t get any more leverage than that. The demand for ARod is far greater than the supply.

    8. October 17th, 2006 | 3:39 pm

      ~~~The Yanks won 101, 95 and 97 games while he was here, so if he had an adverse effect on the team, they had a funny way of showing it.~~~

      By saying this, you imply that the team is A-Rod, no? What about the other 24 guys? Maybe they won all those games?

    9. Raf
      October 17th, 2006 | 4:06 pm

      By saying this, you imply that the team is A-Rod, no? What about the other 24 guys? Maybe they won all those games?
      ============
      I’m simply pointing out the obvious. ARod hurting the team? They won 97 games. He had a better year last season and they won LESS games with him on the team.

      Is he or isn’t he a distraction? Is he or isn’t he a disruption? We hear all this crap about how he’s either a distraction or a disruption (or both), yet the Yanks have played near .600 ball. They did the same before he came on the scene. They’ll do the same when he leaves.

      So what’s the deal? Is he hurting the team? Is he helping the team? Despite all the negative coverage, he had a pretty decent year. Despite the hype and hoopla surrounding him, the Yanks won 97 games. So what’s the deal?

      Instead of the media focusing on “All ARod, all the time” maybe they could focus on the seeing what the Yanks could do about getting some decent starting pitching?

    10. MJ
      October 17th, 2006 | 4:26 pm

      I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, if Torre can’t work with A-Rod then Torre is the problem here.

      =======================================

      It takes two to tango. Why is Torre necessarily the problem? If (and I stress the if) reports are to be believed, ARod’s teammates in Texas didn’t particularly care for him and the same has been said of his teammates here in New York. So it’s not really Joe’s fault that he’s dealing with a husband (the Yankees) and wife (ARod) that, for whatever reason, just can’t get it together all the time.

      I’m sure Joe shares some of the blame, but, what, ARod doesn’t? Come on, he’s a friggin’ freak at this point. He can’t get out of his own way.

    11. jonm
      October 17th, 2006 | 5:09 pm

      and, actually, maybe something a little less considering that the Yankees will not be off-setting Rodriguez’ pay (like the Rangers did when they threw money into the 2004 trade)
      —————————————–

      I don’t follow your logic here at all. Who cares whether the trading team offsets pay? Outside of three years in age, the Yankees would be trading the same player they acquired — a first ballot Hall of Famer who makes approximately $16 million a year from the acquiring team.

      Also, for whatever reason, the Yankees were able to really rip off the Rangers in that deal. Why more teams didn’t want a $16 million a year A-Rod in 2003 is beyond me.

      The Rangers had to trade A-Rod given that his contract apparently was killing them. A-Rod’s contract is nothing to the Yankees. I would certainly hope that the Yankees would not get ripped off like the Rangers did.

    12. RICH
      October 17th, 2006 | 5:37 pm

      and several teams have stated that they would love to have ARod.
      ===============
      christopher, Which teams have stated this? Sounds like tampering to me.

    13. October 17th, 2006 | 6:13 pm

      By now, I’m sure that Cashman has had every team that inquired call Boras and see if they are on the list. This is a potential H. Walker deal.
      Cash will get everything he can for ARod and it will be a lot. Some teams never learn that big offensive players don’t win games.
      The Cubs have nothing in their system so they have to offer Zanbrano. Yanks can take Wood or Pryor as a throw in. The D’Backs and the LA’s will offer even more. Chance of a life time!

    14. Yu Hsing Chen
      October 18th, 2006 | 4:53 am

      Yes i’m sure the Cubs would trade Za”n”brano too.

    15. October 18th, 2006 | 3:46 pm

      “m” Excuse me!

    Leave a reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.