• Yanks Sign Two “Pitchers”

    Posted by on November 27th, 2010 · Comments (4)

    Via mlb.com

    The Yankees added some depth to their pitching ranks on Saturday, signing right-hander Brian Anderson and left-hander Andy Sisco to Minor League deals, according to a published report.

    The Yankees have neither confirmed nor commented on the reported signings.

    According to FoxSports.com’s Ken Rosenthal, both Anderson and Sisco were also given invitations to the Yankees’ Major League Spring Training camp.

    Anderson is an outfielder trying to become a pitcher. Andy Sisco wants to be like A.J. Burnett.

    File these two signings under:  G.M. Eyewash.

    Comments on Yanks Sign Two “Pitchers”

    1. MJ Recanati
      November 27th, 2010 | 7:23 pm

      I’ve never understood why these moves draw your ire or cause you to criticize the GM. What’s the problem with having cannon fodder sitting in AAA at the ready in the event the Yankees need an extra arm at the last minute? How is it bad for the organization to try and look under every rock for players that might be able to provide value in limited roles?

      Teams sign these types of guys all the time. If you don’t find fault with it for others, why do you care that the Yankees do it to?

    2. November 27th, 2010 | 10:53 pm

      I’m just saying that those who wish to label these moves “another low risk, high reward masterstroke by Cashman” need to drop the rose-colored glasses and smell the coffee. Call it what it is – cannon fodder acquistions, nothing more, nothing less.

    3. Raf
      November 28th, 2010 | 12:24 am

      Who are “those?”

      At any rate, cannon fodder acquisitions sometimes work out, hence the low/no risk high reward tag that these signing sometimes are. Maybe they make the team, maybe they’re dumped in ST, maybe they contribute during the season, maybe they’re flipped for a useful part.

      It really isn’t that big a deal.

    4. Evan3457
      November 28th, 2010 | 3:22 am

      I’ve tried explaining this a number of times…maybe not here, but elsewhere, so I’ll do it again here…

      You can only make a “low-risk, high-reward” acquisition if you pick up a player at no cost or very low cost. And since nobody’s giving you a talented young player of some potential for no cost, or low cost, such pickups must be, by definition, of players who have no or little apparent value at the time they’re picked up.

      Now, such players have a low probability of “hitting”, but when they do, the reward is disproportionate to the risk, so much so that it makes them very cost-effective, even if you have to pick up 50 to get two “hits”.

      Likewise, if you want a “rip-off” trade in your favor, it requires one of two things, and sometimes both. You must either acquire a “salary dump”, or you must for a player coming off a bad year so that his currently perceived value is much lower than his actual value.

      You can’t make a “rip-off” trade for someone of obvious value, because if he has obvious value, you can’t acquire him for “peanuts”.

      An example: Would you trade a 27 year old centerfielder coming off a somewhat down year who nevertheless made the All-Star team that season for a flank outfielder who’s 29 years old, coming off two straight down years, including the worst full season of his career that season; a hitter who has to be platooned because his lifetime quadruple slash numbers against pitchers who throw from the same side are .192/.249/.328/.577?

      Of course you wouldn’t…and you just missed out on ripping off the Cincinnati Reds for Paul O’Neill.

    Leave a reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.