Verducci: Another Year, Another Philosophy, For Yanks
Via Tom Verducci -
“I’m definitely fully invested in a lot of the young talent. You get attached to it.”
– Yankees general manager Brian Cashman after passing on Johan Santana, Dec. 4, 2007.
“I will be patient with the young pitchers and players. There’s no question about that because I know how these players develop. But as far as missing the playoffs — if we miss the playoffs by the end of this year, I don’t know how patient I’ll be.”
– Hank Steinbrenner, just 56 days later, Jan. 29, 2008
Another year, another philosophy. The Yankees blew up their “investment” in young players after only one year. Nothing like missing the playoffs just once to scare the Yankees into turning their organizational culture on a dime — well, millions of dimes, actually.
The Yankees would rather give a medical risk such as A.J. Burnett five guaranteed years and pay a declining Andy Pettitte $10 million to be a No. 5 starter than give the ball to Phil Hughes, who has gone from the wonder child not worth trading for Santana to a spare part. Ian Kennedy? Forgotten. Melky Cabrera? Unmentionable.
The Yankees also gave thought to trading for centerfielder Mike Cameron, which would give them seven everyday players next year at ages 30, 33, 35, 35, 35, 36 and 37 — smack in defiance of the industry-wide trend of the The Testing Era of winning with young players in the actuarial sweet spot of their careers.
Was it panic? No, more of a rush to business as usual. It was surprising to hear so many general managers on their way out of the winter meetings badmouthing the Yankees’ checkbook approach to team architecture. “The Yankees bid against themselves for CC Sabathia.” “The Yankees are crazy to guarantee Burnett five years.” “The Yankees are bad for baseball in these economic times.”
Those people should know better. The Yankees are a global operation that must run at peak capacity, which means, at a minimum, four million paying customers per year, strong ratings on their regional sports network and a postseason berth.
This brings me to a point that I think is worth sharing. I could see, in the near or far future, some parties trying to paint the Sabathia and Burnett moves as being Hank Steinbrenner driven – and, therefore, if they don’t work out, Brian Cashman’s ledger should not be charged with these two.
Bull-dung.
If Brian Cashman had enough clout in the Yankees organization this time last year to say “No, we’re not trading Hughes, Kennedy and Cabrera for Johan Santana” then he has enough clout to say, this year, “No, we’re not spending $82.5 million on A.J. Burnett.”
If you want to go back in time and blame the Jaret Wright signing on the Tampa boys, and not Cashman, that’s fine. And, I agree. Most reports back that up – that Brian had nothing to do with Wright…and Tony Womack that off-season. But, that’s when Big Stein was still a factor, too.
The signing of CC Sabathia and A.J. Burnett this off-season are all on Brian Cashman. Just like the trade for Jeff Weaver. Just like the signing of Carl Pavano. Just like the posting for Kei Igawa. And, when this is all said and done, the results of these two moves (albeit good or bad) belong on Cashman’s resume.
It would be great if these two moves offset the moves that Cashman made in the off-season of 2004-05. If that happened, that would leave Weaver and Igawa as the two huge bad marks on Cash’s report card. And, that’s not too bad – when you consider how long he’s been around.
But, if Sabathia melts in New York – and, he should not, based on the feedback that we’ve seen so far – and if Burnett ends up missing 30+ starts over the life of his contract and pitches so-so when he does throw, it will be two more scars on the body of work that Cashman has fathered in Yankeeland. And, anyone who wants to say those demerits belong somewhere else should be frisked to find their “Cashman Kool-Aid Drinkers ‘It Seemed Like The Right Move At The Time’ Rationalization Party”™ membership card.
Steve:
You are correect — these moves are on Cashman’s scorecard. But that cuts both ways. He deserves full blame if they fail and credit if they work.
The sole purpose of the signings is to put the Yankees in the play-offs this year and next. Thye are a bridge to the day when the young talent matures and carries its weight. They are designed to recognize the relaity of the aging everyday line-up — this team’s window of opportunity is now and next year, not three years from now when some of the prospects beginto approach major-league ready.
The Yankees approached the off season last year with a poorly-conceived plan. They tried to compare young (and, as it turned out, unready)pitching with a mature batting order. To their credit — Cashman and the Steinbrenners — they realized the same plan would not promise better results this year. They have adapted.
The question, I would argue, is not whether the new plan better reflects the reality of the aging, win-now line-up. Rather, at issue is whether the specific moves are best execution of the plan. Was Burnett a better choice than Lowe? Would Sheets make more sense than Pettite? We can and will judge Cashman on that basis. I agree the moves show no special brilliance. Cashman is a corporate leader with abundant resources who makes choices among costly options.
Injuries happen in starting rotations every year. Hughes, Kennedy, and Aceves are likely to get plenty of starts in the Bromx even with the signings. Chamberlain (if healthy) will hit an innings cap in August, creatign an opening. The current model simply doesn’t count on Hughes et al to be the 3rd, 4th, and 5th starters up front. After last year’s debacle, that is a good thing.
This is now also a pitching staff better designed for the play-offs than some in the recent past. Power arms do well in the post-season. Yes, it is fair to question whether the staff has a track record of play-off success — it clearly does not. But one also has to ask whether there were better, play-off proven options on the market this year.
Bottom line: I judge these moves by what the Yankees do over the next 2-3 years. I fully expect the last years of both contract to be money down the drain. The Yankees are in a position to be able to afford that.
They are a bridge to the day when the young talent matures and carries its weight.
———————————
Clearly Sabathia and Burnett are not a bridge to youth. What they are is the reactionary response to it. I understand and accept the Sabathia deal and I think it was the right move to make for the team. Not so on the Burnett deal. This is an idiotic signing that takes the team’s focus and resources away from the real problem (the offense) and blocks the advancement of Hughes and Kennedy for at least another year.
Tom Verducci has written some stupid-ass columns in his time but I agree with him here that this represents yet another change of course for the team.
AJ Burnett makes me want to dump my season tickets. I don’t want to root for any team that can’t learn from Carl Pavano or Jaret Wright. The talent — no matter how overwhelming and apparent — has always been stunted by injuries. Why invest in a damaged commodity?
Another year, another philosophy. The Yankees blew up their “investment” in young players after only one year.
—————-
Last I checked, Hughes, Kennedy, Chamberlain, Melky, Wang & Cano are still with the team. Last I checked there are still a bunch of arms on the farm.
Let’s not get ahead of ourselves now. The Yanks got the best of both worlds in that they acquired 2/5 of a rotation that only cost them $$, AND they keep their prospects.
This hedges against Wang’s foot not being ready, and innings limits for Chamberlain, Kennedy & Hughes. Of course, when AJ goes on the shelf, we’ll see more kids get worked into the rotation.
I still don’t like the deal because it’s 5 years too long, but I can be somewhat convinced to see the other side. Pavano was a stupid signing, this was probably a dumb one.
“And, anyone who wants to say those demerits belong somewhere else should be frisked to find their “Cashman Kool-Aid Drinkers ‘Low Risk, High Reward’ Rationalization Party”™ membership card.”
This move, by definition, is not low risk. It’s high risk. So anyone who says this wouldn’t be in this club, they’d be flat wrong.
I don’t think anyone is mistaking on whose ledger this week’s moves belong.
It would be great if these two moves offset the moves that Cashman made in the off-season of 2004-05.
————-
They won’t if only for the fact that those moves have already been done; they’re history.
The only stupid moves that were made (off the top of my head) were Pavano, Wright & Womack. At least Wright and Womack were flipped for spare parts.
If you want to go back in time and blame the Jaret Wright signing on the Tampa boys, and not Cashman, that’s fine. And, I agree.
———
I don’t; win as a team, lose as a team.
exactly raf. some people want to act like we traded the farm for sabathia and burnett the year after we passed on trading two of our top prospects for santana. doesn’t make any sense. sabathia+hughes+kennedy+whoever else is greater than santana. not comparable to last offseason when we had to give up players, not just money. bad job by verducci.
agree with you here though steve. these ones are on cashman. one thing i disagree with is that if burnett misses 30 or so starts and pitches so-so it will be a bad deal. if burnett misses an average of 6 starts per year, that probably means he’s making 27-28 starts per year, which is about his last 4 year average of 27. after that, it depends on how you define so-so. if he’s above league average, and makes 27 starts per year on average, this contract will be fine. people get too hung up on “worth”. the yankees aren’t, and shouldn’t be, concerning themselves with “worth”. of course aj burnett is overpaid. but if he’s being overpaid to give us a competitive advantage in the 3/4 slot in the rotation, making 27 starts a year at above average production, then that’s what you pay for. he lead the AL in strikeouts last year, and had six 10+ strikeout games. yankee starters combined had zero. he can dominate a game, and most 3/4 starters cannot do that. that’s why you pay him. burnett as the #1 of this staff would be scary. but burnett in the middle of this rotation could be special.
The Yanks got the best of both worlds in that they acquired 2/5 of a rotation that only cost them $$, AND they keep their prospects.
==================================
This. Cashman has never shown any disinclination to spend money, nor actually has he shown any disinclination to trade away prospects; he just hasn’t wanted to spend money and trade away prospects in the same transaction. And that strikes me as smart.
One need look only at the Santana non-deal, the Nady deal, and the Sabathia and Burnett signings.
Is there a reason why Joe Torre’s court stenographer Tom Verducci is allowed to continue to write about the Yankees? No conflict of interest there, eh Verdooch?
he lead the AL in strikeouts last year, and had six 10+ strikeout games. yankee starters combined had zero. he can dominate a game, and most 3/4 starters cannot do that. that’s why you pay him. burnett as the #1 of this staff would be scary. but burnett in the middle of this rotation could be special.
==============================================
Also, this. I was about to make this point, but Pat went ahead and made it for me. When Burnett’s on, he can dominate. That’s not nothing, and it’s really what separates this signing from the Pavano signing.
Not that it will matter if Burnett bruises his butt and sits on the bench for five years, but what are the odds of that happening twice?
I’m about ready to chuck this blog! It’s one of three I have saved to keep up on the happenings in Yankee land and to read any insights. But this
‘glass half empty’ consistent bullcrap about Cashman is starting to get under my skin. There’s no doubt that this years signings are on Cashman’s watch…I have yet to read anywhere that anyone is suggesting that the Stein’s are making these decisions. My thought’s are that Hal’s in charge and he has given the keys to Cash. I also believe that with the good decisions came the Pavano and Weaver deals. But both looked good at the time. Igawa…well, even I have a problem with that one! To suggest that there is a correlation between the refusal to trade draft picks AND sign Santana to a huge contract and the signings of CC and AJ to huge contracts is deluded or a moron. There’s little doubt that if Cash could have had Santana for a contract OR a trade the deal would have been done. But for both, he rightly said no. And to suggest that in light of the signings Cashman’s philosophy has changed is also shortsighted. Most pitching prospects do not develop before the ages of 24 – 26. IPK is 24, Hughes is 22 and the other kiddies are in that range. These signings allow them to develop in triple AAA where they belong. Yes, I agree that giving slots to all three this past spring was a mistake. And that is a debit if that was Cash’s decision alone. But it could have worked. Just look at the Ray’s. Sheilds and Garza both developed in the rotation. They were given the time to do so. It could have worked and it could have been a disaster. It turned out to be a disaster. Cashman, and whoever else was involved, can not see in the future. He is going to make good decisions and bad decisions. I try to envision what criteria is being used in the decision making process and I like what I see from him. I love Hughes potential. I’d love to see him in the rotation. But I also know he needs a year or two of consistent pitching at Scranton. Now he can do that. And he will be ready when Pettitte or Sheets or Lowe are going or gone. He will be ready when Burnett blows our his elbow or when CC strains his back or Joba strains his shoulder. These things could and very well will happen. Burnett could pitch as much over the next five years as did Pavano over the last four. It’s a gamble. But with his stuff, pitching in a position to actually win, and what he showed last year, I think it’s a good, though expensive, gamble. Would you rather have Burnett coming off the year he had or would you rather have Hughes trying to learn in the big leagues? Either way let’s stop the harping! If you don’t like Cashman that’s up to you. But try to keep your comments professional and logical.
I also believe that with the good decisions came the Pavano and Weaver deals. But both looked good at the time. Igawa…well, even I have a problem with that one!
————–
I think Igawa & Weaver were reasonable, Pavano wasn’t.
Interesting.
FWIW, this entry seems to be logical to me; often you hear signings good or bad, attributed to Tampa & Cashman. Steve is merely saying that it should be clear that these signings are on Cashman, good or bad.
I think an important thing to remember here is that AJ Burnett is not coming in to be the number 1 or even number 2 starter. If Joba is as good as last year, Burnett will be at best a number 4 starter. AJ Burnett is a helluva good #4 guy, especially if he can deliver a big postseason start or two. If we signed Burnett to be “the guy,” I would be worried. As currently constituted, he doesn’t have a tremendous amount of pressure and doesn’t need to win the Cy Young this year.
One quick and dirty way of looking at it;
06: 21 starts, 115 ERA+, which was better than Chacon, Lidle, Ponson, etc
07: 25, 119, better than Clemens Hughes, Igawa, etc
08: 34, 105, better than just about everyone on the staff.
Just a footnote to add…
at first, I had the end part reading~~~…should be frisked to find their “Cashman Kool-Aid Drinkers ‘Low Risk, High Reward’ Rationalization Party”™ membership card.~~~
That was a quick/bad cut and paste job on my part. (We took the kids for a ride on the Santa Train today, I was running late, and we had to run out the door. I just got back.)
That should have read: ~~~should be frisked to find their “Cashman Kool-Aid Drinkers ‘It Seemed Like The Right Move At The Time’ Rationalization Party”™ membership card.~~~
And, I just made that change…for the record.
Sorry to confuse chapters of the Cashman Apologists Association.
And, for the record, I don’t mind if someone wants to disagree with what I wrote here. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. And, different opinions are always welcomed and appreciated here as long as they are presented in a civilized manner.
Related, I would ask that you also respect my right to have my opinion, and share it, rather than demand, etc., that I stop sharing my thoughts on the topic. Thanks.
and if Burnett ends up missing 30+ starts over the life of his contract and pitches so-so when he does throw, it will be two more scars on the body of work that Cashman has fathered in Yankeeland.
==================================
Disagree. Sabathia is a no-brainer right move, even if he tears up his arm this season. Burnett is more risky, but justifiable as a power pitcher with excellent stuff. He’s not another Pavano, Pavano was never as dominant as Burnett can be on occasion.
==================================
Over a 5-year deal, one should EXPECT a pitcher to miss about 20% of it. Some examples:
In 1992, 29-year-old Roger Clemens began a 5-year deal with the Red Sox. He missed 32 starts over the 5 seasons (based on an averaage of 35 starts a year, such as he had given the team 3 of the previous 4 seasons). He was then more durable over the next 6 season, missing only about 10 starts, depending how you calculate it.
In 1997, 30 year-old John Smoltz started a 4-year deal with the Braves. He had made 35 or 36 starts in 4 of the previous 6 seasons, but in 2 of the previous 3, only 21 and 29 starts. He went the full season in 1997, but missed 9 starts in 1998, 6 in 1999, and the entire season in 2000.
Curt Schilling became a big-time starter for the Phillies in 1992. He was 25. Over the next 4 season for he missed a total of 50 starts out of 140. Over the 6 seasons after that, he stabilized, missing only 17 starts. So, from ages 26-35, rough, tough, Curt Schilling missed a total of 67 starts out of 350, or just less than 20%.
Throw out Pedro Martinez’ last 3 injury riddled-seasons and just look at his career from age 25 to age 33, and you’ll find he’d missed a total of 51 starts out of 315, or about 16%
Josh Beckett has never started more than 33 games in a season. Let’s lower the bar slightly for him, and make 34 starts the standard for a front of the rotation guy. We’ll start counting with the 2003 season, where he established himself as a star in the postseason at the age 23, for gosh sakes. He’s missed 36 starts out of 204, or about 17.6%.
Well, what about the dynasty teams? Well, Clemens missed 6 out of 66 in his 2 years, or about 9%. Pettite missed only 6 out of 170, or about 3%. Durable David Wells missed 6 out of 68, or about 9%. El Duque missed 12 out of 99, or, well, 12%, (And right after the 2000 season, his durability was completely gone.) David Cone missed 34 starts out of 165, or a little over 20%. The point here being that even when “brilliant” GMs who “know how to identify pitching talent” make the “right choices”, and the team has a “stable, healthy” starting rotation, pitching, especially power pitching is so inherently damaging that a good rotation, a dynasty rotation, will still lose over 10% of its expected starts to injuries, major and minor.
Just ask Kerry Wood and Mark Prior.
======================================
I would EXPECT Burnett to miss about 20% of his starts over the 5 years, and probably more, as he is older now than he was in the last 5, when he missed about 20% of his starts.
As for “so-so”, the guy has an aggregate ERA+ of 113 for the last 5 years. Nice, but not overwhelming.
AJ Burnett did not get his enormous contract because Cashman is an idiot, and can’t recognize a risky mediocrity. He got it for 3 reasons: he’s was the 2nd or 3rd best pitcher on the market this offseason, the Yanks have money to burn, and there was a competitive bidder.
CC Sabathia did not get his even more enormous contract because Cashman is an idiot, and can’t recognize “pitching talent”. He got it because he was obviously the best pitcher on the market, the Yanks were desperate for an ace and had money to burn, and because he really didn’t want to come to NY when the process began, and had to be convinced in the only way that really matters.
~~Steve is merely saying that it should be clear that these signings are on Cashman, good or bad.~~
Exactly.
~~Over a 5-year deal, one should EXPECT a pitcher to miss about 20% of it.~~
FWIW, guys like Greg Maddux, Tom Glavine, Livan Hernandez, Jeff Suppan, Javier Vazquez, Jamie Moyer, Mark Buehrle, Jon Garland, Derek Lowe, and Andy Pettitte almost never miss a turn…or had long streaks where they never missed a turn. You can find names on both sides of the fence on this one.
Soemone mentioned Pavano in the same breath as Igawa and Weaver again? Here we go again……
Pavano was courted by many different teams (unlike Burnett who only two teams went after). He got a better offer from the REd Sox and went with the Yankees. Pavano became the American Idle BUT when someone is wanted by Seattle, Baltimore, NY and so on they are coveted for a damn good reason. Even Mike and the Mad Dog couldn’t rip the Yankees when Pavano got injured because of his desirability. Ultimately, Pavano didn’t cut it but he had pitched well in the playoffs and had a breakout year. BTW, his old teammate AJerk also pitched (somewhat ) well in his breakout year BUT has never played in the playoffs.
ONce again with AJerk, how did he do against Tampa this year and the rest of the AL? This is where MLB TV will let fans in each market see how well pitchers do against teams they stink against. Burnett has never had an ERA lower than 3.50 and he has an almost 5 ERA when you subtract teams not named the Yankees or the Red Sox. AJerk can be dominant in certain circunstances BUT he can be exceedingly mediocre. He has million dollar talent but a ten cent head!
Lilly was traded for Weaver. Why would any sane GM trade someone who could pitch in NYC and in Yankee Stadium for a guy who never pitched a big game under pressure and in the AL’s ultimate pitcher’s park? Cash Man did. That was a stupid trade.
AS for Igawa, are you kidding? You must be because the Yanks had a chance to pick up Lilly (who won 17 games in the AL East with the Jays). What the hell did Igawa ever do in the MLB? He was the Yankees’ second choice AFTER Dice-K! A smart GM would get a player who did decently and was not only pitch in the division but for the Yankees themselves. Instead , Cash Man goes for a guy who never threw a pitch in the MLB and didn’t have knockout stuff. Whatta waste Igawa is, the Yanks have to hide this piece of garbage in AAA and someone claims that it was OK!!!??
Butchie,
Jeff Weaver trade
http://tinyurl.com/5j25sk
Yanks win bid to Igawa
http://tinyurl.com/5ecs4g
Another angle on Igawa, from the NYT;
“Signing Lilly or Meche — neither of whom has ever exceeded 15 victories or 200 innings — would cost the Yankees more than it would other teams.
Because of the luxury tax on their payroll, the Yankees would effectively pay $56 million to sign a pitcher to a four-year, $40 million contract. (The tax forces the Yankees to pay $1.40 for every dollar on their payroll.) Internally, the Yankees have determined that no pitcher on the market is worth that much.
In that light, Igawa is more appealing for the Yankees, even if he is no better than a No. 5 starter. The $26 million the Yankees bid to negotiate is not subject to luxury taxes. With no other teams competing, the Yankees are hopeful of signing Igawa to a four-year deal for $18 million, at most.
If he does not sign, Igawa will return to the Hansin Tigers and the Yankees will not pay the $26 million. If he does sign, he will join Johnson, Pavano, Chien-Ming Wang and Mike Mussina in the rotation.”
As always hindsight remains 20/20…
Lilly was traded for Weaver. Why would any sane GM trade someone who could pitch in NYC and in Yankee Stadium
—————-
Perhaps because there are other places besides NYC & Yankee Stadium where a pitcher is needed?
Pavano
http://tinyurl.com/ynpke7
FWIW, guys like Greg Maddux, Tom Glavine, Livan Hernandez, Jeff Suppan, Javier Vazquez, Jamie Moyer, Mark Buehrle, Jon Garland, Derek Lowe, and Andy Pettitte almost never miss a turn…or had long streaks where they never missed a turn. You can find names on both sides of the fence on this one.
=================================
Of those guys, the only one who could be argued to be a power pitcher is Vazquez, and while he didn’t miss a turn in 2004 with the Yanks, his 2nd half was a disaster, and he was rumored to have pitched through an elbow inury of some sort. Is that really better.
Three of those you named are left-handed slopballers.
You might recall the Yanks tried to get Greg Maddux and outbid everyone for him, but he didn’t want to play in New York. After that, they never really tried again, because they knew what his feelings were.
Livan Hernadez, Jon Garland and Jeff Suppan…well, let’s just say they’re not exctly power pitchers, and havn’t been for a very, very long time.
Make your own list of power pitchers (I dunno; averaging 7-8 K per 9?), and try to find a bunch that suffer significany losses of playing time somewhere during the middle of their careers.
That last line should read:
“and try to find a bunch that didn’t suffer significant losses of rotation time somewhere during the middle of their careers.”