• Yanks Sign Russell Martin

    Posted by on December 14th, 2010 · Comments (13)

    The Britt Burns of catchers?

    Via MLB Hot Stove -

    The Yankees have agreed to terms on a contract with Russell Martin, multiple sources told MLB.com on Monday. Details of the deal were not immediately available, but it is expected to be announced at some point on Tuesday.

    Martin was said to have been deciding between the Red Sox and Blue Jays.

    Martin, 27, was deemed among the best catchers in the National League from 2007-08, when he was a back-to-back All-Star while compiling a .286 batting average, .380 on-base percentage and 32 homers for the Dodgers. But after a down year in 2009, Martin played 97 games in 2010 and then missed the rest of the season with a broken hip.

    Comments on Yanks Sign Russell Martin

    1. MJ Recanati
      December 14th, 2010 | 11:49 am

      As long as it’s a 1Y/$6M deal or less, I’m all for this move. I’m even OK if the Yanks included an option year with a $2M buyout.

      There’s nothing wrong with improving the defense behind the plate, giving Montero more time to earn the job, relegating Cervelli to AAA (or trading him for a bit-part bullpen arm) and keeping Posada to 5 days of DH duty a week and one game behind the plate every so often.

    2. KPOcala
      December 14th, 2010 | 12:58 pm

      “The Britt Burns of catching”. Too funny (and your showing your age)! I would imagine that the idea is to keep Montero from becoming the Russell Martin of catching. Good move.

    3. Corey Italiano
      December 14th, 2010 | 1:01 pm

      “It would be a rare situation for me to include Montero in a deal.” – Cashman

      Translation from Cash-speak:

      Montero’s gone. Soon.

    4. MJ Recanati
      December 14th, 2010 | 1:26 pm

      @ Corey Italiano:
      I think there’s value to understanding that Cashman may not always say what he means to do but there’s also a point where simply assuming that he’ll always go the opposite way is being too dogmatic.

      Just because he’s saying he won’t deal Montero doesn’t mean he absolutely will or absolutely won’t.

      In any case, if trading Montero addresses the pitching staff with a good player (say Felix Hernandez), I’m all for it. Montero’s best value to the organization has always been as a trade chip.

    5. Raf
      December 14th, 2010 | 1:27 pm

      @ Corey Italiano:
      Not unless Halliday or Lee is coming in return; those are the only two deals where Montero was on the table, IIRC.

    6. Raf
      December 14th, 2010 | 1:27 pm

      Referring to the caliber of pitcher…

    7. Evan3457
      December 14th, 2010 | 1:53 pm

      Corey Italiano wrote:

      “It would be a rare situation for me to include Montero in a deal.” – CashmanTranslation from Cash-speak: Montero’s gone. Soon.

      Actually, he only offered Montero for Halladay and Lee.

      As there are no such pitchers available at the moment (except Greinke) Montero is likely to stay put.

    8. Evan3457
      December 14th, 2010 | 1:54 pm

      Raf wrote:

      @ Corey Italiano:
      Not unless Halliday or Lee is coming in return; those are the only two deals where Montero was on the table, IIRC.

      GMTA.

      Yuh got the drop on me, pardner.

    9. Evan3457
      December 14th, 2010 | 1:57 pm

      As I recall Burns had a chronic hip degeneration, not a “broken hip”. If it’s a clean break, and if it’s his only health problem, he should be OK, and the extra rest last year might actually help him.

      He’ll be at least as good as Cervelli, and probably considerably better, if truly recovered.

      We’ll see.

    10. 77yankees
      December 14th, 2010 | 9:27 pm

      MJ Recanati wrote:
      In any case, if trading Montero addresses the pitching staff with a good player (say Felix Hernandez), I’m all for it. Montero’s best value to the organization has always been as a trade chip.

      Right – expanding on what we had touched on earlier – if the Mariners call and offer King Felix for Montero and a couple of other prospects, I’m totally fine with that. You have to give up something to get something, and that’s fair.

      What I cringe at is them using Montero as a trading chip for a knee-jerk move to acquire a Greinke, or a Josh Johnson, or even an Adam Wainwright if the Cards decide to trade him to free up $ for Pujols.

    11. MJ Recanati
      December 14th, 2010 | 10:15 pm

      77yankees wrote:

      What I cringe at is them using Montero as a trading chip for a knee-jerk move to acquire a Greinke, or a Josh Johnson, or even an Adam Wainwright if the Cards decide to trade him to free up $ for Pujols.

      I’m agnostic on Zack Greinke; I think he’s got a lot of talent and I’m not completely convinced that he can’t pitch in New York but if the team feels that he can’t then that’s good enough for me. I don’t see why Josh Johnson or Adam Wainwright are cringe-worthy. Those are two of the better pitchers in the game.

    12. 77yankees
      December 14th, 2010 | 10:39 pm

      @ MJ Recanati:

      That goes back to my long standing thesis about NL pitchers coming to the AL – it’s a much different beast in the DH league, and those who are used to having their ERA in the 2.75 range may be in for shell shock when it jumps above 4.00 in the AL.

      I’m not saying Johnson & Wainwright aren’t good pitchers, and no, I don’t necessarily think they’d totally get lit up in the AL. But if you swap your best prospect with expectations of getting a #2 starter, you’re getting into another AJ situation, where you think you’re getting a #2 starter and you end up with one that produces like a #3 or #4.

    13. MJ Recanati
      December 15th, 2010 | 7:17 am

      @ 77yankees:
      The theory has to have flexibility, however. I agree that NL pitchers tend to blow up in the AL. I’m not sure I agree that those two particular pitchers (Josh Johnson/Adam Wainwright) would fit the rule. They’re both pretty darn talented with good K ratios.

    Leave a reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.