For what it’s worth, I don’t think you can ignore the fact that Nick Johnson (ignoring his injury history), Marcus Thames, and even Juan Rivera have been successful major league players. The fact that it wasn’t with the Yankees is not an indictment of the minor league system.

To my understanding. The key is to fill your system with as many good prospects as possible. Trade most of them for ready major leaguers and keep the 2 or 3 that look like certainty’s to make it with your own club.

Basically what Boston did. Trade off some of your better prospects…get Beckett and Lowell. Then keep Pedroia, Jacoby, Papelbon, Youkilis and go from there.

Well, if the Yankees have such a great heap of prospects in the system, then why would they not part with any of them for Santana?
———
Because the asking price was too high. THEN there’s the matter of the extension they would have to sign Santana to.

At the end of the day, it wasn’t worth it.

Having good prospects is important but so is the present – you don’t need to abandon one to develop the other.
————————————
I don’t see any evidence of the Yankees having opted for one strategy at the expense of the other. Did they not re-sign A-Rod to the largest contract in baseball history? Did they not extend Andy Pettitte to a contract that pays him nearly as much as Josh Beckett and CC Sabathia — 2007′s Cy Young finalists — combined? Hard to say that a team with a $200M+ payroll has abandoned the present.

For the first time in quite a while, the team has legitimately good prospects that the baseball world is excited about. What they become is anyone’s guess but I don’t see any downside in having the biggest payroll and the best farm system. Isn’t that what you’re supposed to do with your buckets of cash? Invest it?

Well, if the Yankees have such a great heap of prospects in the system, then why would they not part with any of them for Santana?
————————————-
Again, you’re either missing the point or not reading what I’m writing.

As I said, “…he’s stockpiling enough so that a) once an acceptable level of depth is acquired, he can have better leverage for trades…” Maybe Cashman felt that trading for Santana this winter represented too steep a price given that the farm system didn’t have the depth at AA/AAA to make these trades?

Cashman has never said he wouldn’t trade minor leaguers away. He’s simply passed on the one high-profile deal that came through his desk this winter that we all know about. And, based on the asking price (to say nothing of the contract), he was absolutely right to do so.

“The Mets may be more likely to make the playoffs this year, thanks to their strong starting rotation and weak competition – and the Yankees’ weak starting rotation and strong competition.”

The Mets “strong starting rotation”? Did I miss something? Does Davidoff actually follow these teams? I like the Yanks chances this year very much, thank you.

As for the prospects issue, some of us (albeit very few)on this site have regularly cautioned against the irrational exuberance surronding many of the Yankees prospects by others on this site. Having good prospects is important but so is the present – you don’t need to abandon one to develop the other.

I don’t like this post because, using Steve’s logic, a Miami Dolphins blogger could have posted something like this:
“Possible bad news, Miami selects first overall pick, fans should prepare for let-down. In recent memory, the number 1 pick in the NFL draft is often a letdown. Prime examples are Alex Smith (2005), David Carr (2002), Michael Vick (2001), Courtney Brown (2000), Tim Couch (1999). Judgement being reserved on the 3 most recent picks. That means that from ’99-’05, only 2 first round picks haven’t been let downs. Therefore, Miami fans out to be worried that their team is picking first overall.”

While the facts are true that there have been many 1st pick busts, does this mean that Dolphins fans should have wanted the 5th pick instead? or the 8th? or the 20th?

Obviously, if something is rated highly, be it a current player, prospect, or farm system, there is a chance for a let down. If the player or system is rated low, there is a chance to be pleasantly surprised. Does this mean we want the Yankees farm system to be rankly poorly so we can be surprised when unknowns make the big league roster?

As someone above said, everyone knows most baseball prospects don’t make it. Minor league baseball has thousands of players, the MLB draft is inconcievably long compared to other drafts.

Are we just arguing semantics on this one? Is the glass either half-full or half-empty, and I see it as the former while you, Steve, see it as the latter?

Why is it so hard to understand that in trading for Santana Yankees would’ve had to pay twice? Prospects AND an obscene amount of money? I bet Cash would’ve made the trade if it was one OR the other, but as it was that deal simply didn’t make sense. And it still doesn’t, by the way. Same thing with Sabathia.

~~~It’s possible you didn’t know anything about the farm system at the time — because it wasn’t followed as closely back then — but… were you saying these same things in 1994?~~~

Outside of Jeter and Williams, what “prospects” from *then* went on to be part of the great teams of the late ’90s? Rivera, Pettitte and Rivera – and Mendoza – helped, yes – no question. But, were they super-hyped prospects at the time? No. In a way, the Yankees were lucky that Pettitte, Posada and Rivera developed the way that they did…because many did not see them as becoming stars. It’s sorta of like Wang and Cano. How many times passed on Cano, in trade offers? A lot. Because he was not considered a future star.

Again, the point here is…if you wait on your “stud” prospects…and think that they’re all going to be stars, en masse, you’re making a mistake.