• A.J. Burnett Is The Tucker Ashford Of Pitchers

    Posted by on August 20th, 2011 · Comments (63)

    And, I think we’ve seen enough.

    Just like Mike Griffin, he’s fooled us long enough. We found out about him today. That should do it for him.

    Cashman can take the objective pipe and stick it up his poop chute.

    Burnett is a turd. And, he must be flushed.

    Comments on A.J. Burnett Is The Tucker Ashford Of Pitchers

    1. Evan3457
      August 20th, 2011 | 10:42 pm

      The Yanks are NOT flushing $33 million. It doesn’t work that way.

    2. cr1
      August 20th, 2011 | 10:47 pm

      Since we have five better options in the rotation already, nothing should stand in the way of Girardi and staff immediately finding some reason to put AJ on the DL until further notice.

    3. 77yankees
      August 20th, 2011 | 10:51 pm

      With the doubleheader next Saturday and then no day off until Sept 8th, we’re probably looking at two more starts from him until they can go back to a 5 man rotation.

    4. August 20th, 2011 | 10:54 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      The Yanks are NOT flushing $33 million. It doesn’t work that way.

      Really? Didn’t Cashman flush $46 million away when he banished Igawa to the minors?

    5. rg.williams
      August 20th, 2011 | 10:57 pm

      This is a disservice to Tucker Ashford.

    6. rg.williams
      August 20th, 2011 | 10:58 pm
    7. K-V-C
      August 20th, 2011 | 11:09 pm

      I can’t see Cashman and the Yanks banishing A.J for the rest of this year and 2 more besides, to the minors. Especially as Cash keeps defending him…

      They need to move him into the pen for the rest of the season, and trade him for someone else’s problem in the off season.
      (Zambrano comes to mind…$18 million + vesting option he probably can’t meet for another $19.250,000)

    8. KPOcala
      August 20th, 2011 | 11:11 pm

      Mop-up bullpen guy, most likely.

    9. Jim TreshFan
      August 20th, 2011 | 11:44 pm

      Burnett is headed for a post season like Barry Zito’s last year.

    10. redbug
      August 21st, 2011 | 6:13 am

      Here’s AJ after the game, “It’s a hiccup, man,” Burnett said. “I had a bad night.”

      According to LoHud, Girardi said he still has confidence in Burnett and the Yankees will work to get him back on track.

      And of course Cashman said, we all think AJ stinks because he makes a lot of money.

      A “hiccup”? The hiccup was the last game he pitched and actually won. The 1st since the end of June and the 1st one in Aug since he’s been a Yankee (despite giving up 10 hits and not getting out of the 6th inning).

      They’re going “work to get him back on track”? Joe and Cashman have been saying that since he became a Yankee.

      Steve’s right. They blew $46 mill (plus his annual salary) on Igawa. It’s time to admit the mistake and move on.

    11. August 21st, 2011 | 7:23 am

      At this point, I think you have to bury Burnett the way that Jeff Weaver was handled in 2003. And, then, in the off-season, trade him the way that Jeff Weaver was traded.

      And, of course, if, for some strange reason that Burnett is in the bullpen during the post-season, DON’T pitch him in a game the way that Weaver was used in the 2003 WS.

    12. August 21st, 2011 | 7:24 am

      By the way, in case anyone is scoring at home, the GM who acquired and gave contracts to both Weaver and Burnett is Brian Cashman.

    13. Greg H.
      August 21st, 2011 | 10:42 am

      I reckon he could be moved in the offseason, but the Yanks will have to take on a bunch of the salary. He should definitely not be on the postseason roster. I mistrust him even more out of the pen than in the rotation – lack of control and many wild pitches do not bode well for big relief appearances.

      I give Burnett credit for what he did for us in 09, but at this point he’s just a hinderance to the development of one of our young arms by taking up a rotation spot. Even Laffey pitched much better than he did last night. Next year’s rotation will look completely different, so we may as well make a clean sweep of it and sell someone else on the promise of AJ “getting right.”

    14. Raf
      August 21st, 2011 | 10:46 am

      Steve L. wrote:

      By the way, in case anyone is scoring at home, the GM who acquired and gave contracts to both Weaver and Burnett is Brian Cashman.

      And they both were no-brainer moves. Like Sabathia and Mussina.

    15. Raf
      August 21st, 2011 | 10:49 am

      Greg H. wrote:

      at this point he’s just a hinderance to the development of one of our young arms by taking up a rotation spot.

      No he isn’t.

    16. Greg H.
      August 21st, 2011 | 10:50 am

      All you guys that are slamming Cashman and Girardi for what they say in the media about this – what should they be saying? That he’s washed up and isn’t worth a bag of balls? They cannot and should not be saying that. They’re saying exactly what they have to say right now, and nothing more. If they try to move him in he offseason, they need to keep the myth alive that he’s got something left of value. And for the sake of the team right now, they must back their players and hope they turn things around – like Derek Jeter and Nick Swisher seem to have done. The real test of Cashman and Girardi will be to see if AJ’s name is on the postseason roster.

    17. Greg H.
      August 21st, 2011 | 10:52 am

      @ Raf:
      How do you figure? I’d rather see if someone from AAA has something to contribute in these last couple months than drag that ol’ pony out there. And if he’s back next year he’ll absolutely be a hinderance.

    18. August 21st, 2011 | 10:55 am

      Raf wrote:

      And they both were no-brainer moves. Like Sabathia and Mussina.

      No way. Check the resumes of CC and Moose before NY and then check the resumes of AJ and Weaver.

    19. Raf
      August 21st, 2011 | 10:57 am

      Greg H. wrote:

      I’d rather see if someone from AAA has something to contribute in these last couple months than drag that ol’ pony out there.

      Like who? If someone in AAA is up against innings limits, they’re not going to contribute much to the postseason run, unless it’s out of the pen. Girardi’s not going to go with a rookie in that situation; look how long it took to bench Posada. Montero’s still @ AAA despite Cervelli’s shortcomings at catcher, and Posada’s shortcomings at DH.

      Burnett isn’t blocking anyone.

      Cashman and Girardi singing Burnett’s praises, means very little. That they keep doing it tells me that there’s something afoot.

    20. Raf
      August 21st, 2011 | 10:58 am

      Steve L. wrote:

      No way. Check the resumes of CC and Moose before NY and then check the resumes of AJ and Weaver.

      Yes way. Look at the coverage when either pitcher was acquired.

    21. Greg H.
      August 21st, 2011 | 11:20 am

      Raf wrote:

      Cashman and Girardi singing Burnett’s praises, means very little. That they keep doing it tells me that there’s something afoot.

      This I agree with 100%.

    22. Scout
      August 21st, 2011 | 11:40 am

      Something afoot? Not necessarily. It’s basic management that you don’t run down your own organization’s assets, because you don’t want to devalue them in the marketplace. George Steinbrenner forgot this often (and foolishly), but Cashman never does. Plus, I doubt it helps Burnett to call him a turd. Would that help your self-confidence?

      I don’t think Burnett is holding back some top prospect at AAA. After all, the Yankees have been using six starters, and dropping him from the rotation would not open a space for anyone. Possibly they will put A.J. in the bullpen in September, but it will be called a temporary move.

      After the season, absent a trade, I expect the Yankees to let go either Colon or Garcia. This would restore Burnett to the rotation, provisionally. But next season, when he is again ineffective, he’ll be on a shorter leash. (Please note I am not recommending this course, merely suggesting it is likely.)

      Burnett has virtually no trade value. Dealing him for another bad contract such as Zambrano’s does nothing but exchange headaches. The Yankees would have to pay another team a large sum to unload Burnett’s contract. Until there is a top prospect knockign at the door, I would not anticipate that. It is more likely in year five of A.J.’s deal.

    23. Evan3457
      August 21st, 2011 | 12:55 pm

      Steve L. wrote:

      Evan3457 wrote:
      The Yanks are NOT flushing $33 million. It doesn’t work that way.
      Really? Didn’t Cashman flush $46 million away when he banished Igawa to the minors?

      No, actually he didn’t. The two cases are not remotely the same:

      1. $25 million was lost before he signed in the bid for his services. Yanks have lost $4 million a year from Igawa. When they sent Igawa to the minors, they were on the hook for $4 million a year, not $16.5 million a year.

      2. And they didn’t release him, but sent him to AA and AAA in an apparent effort to make him quit, which he didn’t do. Burnett can’t be sent to the minors without his permission at this point in his career (Does the name Jason Giambi ring a bell?).

    24. Evan3457
      August 21st, 2011 | 1:00 pm

      Steve L. wrote:

      By the way, in case anyone is scoring at home, the GM who acquired and gave contracts to both Weaver and Burnett is Brian Cashman.

      No, actually, Weaver signed a 4 year deal with the Tigers in 2002. Yanks picked up that deal in the trade.

    25. Evan3457
      August 21st, 2011 | 1:04 pm

      Steve L. wrote:

      At this point, I think you have to bury Burnett the way that Jeff Weaver was handled in 2003.

      I would agree with doing that, once Garcia is off the DL.

      And, then, in the off-season, trade him the way that Jeff Weaver was traded.

      The market for Weaver was better than the market for AJ would be. He wa 25, and teams thought they might be able to fix him. The market for AJ is the market for Zambrano; which is to say: none. But if the Yanks are able to trade him, and the players they get for him stink, especially any pitchers, make sure you attack Cashman for that, too, just as you do when you criticize him for both Weaver and Kevin Brown.

      And, of course, if, for some strange reason that Burnett is in the bullpen during the post-season, DON’T pitch him in a game the way that Weaver was used in the 2003 WS.

      He might not even make the post-season roster at this point. We’ll see.

    26. Evan3457
      August 21st, 2011 | 1:09 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Steve L. wrote:
      By the way, in case anyone is scoring at home, the GM who acquired and gave contracts to both Weaver and Burnett is Brian Cashman.

      No, actually, Weaver signed a 4 year deal with the Tigers in 2002.

      That would be Randy Smith who signed that deal (with president Dave Dombrowski approving), saying at the time: “In my mind, Jeff is one of the best young pitchers in the game,” Tigers general manager Randy Smith said. “He’s a guy that’s gotten better every single year and I think will continue to improve as we go forward.

      The Yanks picked up that contract in the trade.

    27. August 21st, 2011 | 1:31 pm

      The last two seasons have been about this guy. The failed trade for Lee with Seattle in July 2010, and last offseason free agent quest for Lee. The search for a second starter that we kept hearing Cashman would resolve by the end of July. Once again we approach the end of August without that second pitcher that we all know the team will need to have any chance in October.

      This won’t be solved in season. Putting him on the postseason roster, leaving him off the postseason roster, doesn’t matter, there just isn’t a second starter available on the trade at this point in the season. He’ll ger one more August start, we’ll see how that goes. He can be spot started the rest of the way avoiding high leverage situations and then placed at the back of the pen or left off the postseason roster. The key, Cashman, Cashman/Girardi must end all thoughts that this guy (a) has egreat stuff (b) can be fixed. Maybe Dave Duncan in St. Louis can do something, whatever, this guy has to be moved after the season. That’s it.

    28. Raf
      August 21st, 2011 | 2:27 pm

      Scout wrote:

      Something afoot? Not necessarily. It’s basic management that you don’t run down your own organization’s assets, because you don’t want to devalue them in the marketplace.

      Regardless, the rest of the teams in MLB aren’t dumb. Burnett’s struggles aren’t exactly a secret. An acquiring team would be interested because they see something that they could fix (think Victor Zambrano with the Mets), or they think that Burnett would be a better fit in their organization (an NL team, for example), or that they would be swapping one project for another (the oft rumored Burnett for Carlos Zambrano deal).

      I don’t think that Burnett will be dealt (he has a NTC, IIRC), but I would not be surprised if he were to miss a turn in the rotation to try and sort things out (whatever that means).

    29. bags
      August 22nd, 2011 | 2:07 pm

      dude, what’s with all the poop chute and turd stuff. they are people. you’d banish me forever if i directed any of that sort of language at you.

    30. Kamieniecki
      November 19th, 2013 | 11:37 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      The Yanks are NOT flushing $33 million. It doesn’t work that way.

      No; Cashman flushed only $20 million.

      Raf wrote:

      Regardless, the rest of the teams in MLB aren’t dumb.

      Pittsburgh certainly wasn’t dumb; Huntingon recognized that Burnett would be more comfortable pitching in a small-market environment, with a potential to become the franchise’s no. 1 starter, and that the G.M. of the New York Yankees, not known for his intelligence, would agree to pay $20 million of Burnett’s salary.

    31. McMillan
      November 20th, 2013 | 9:35 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      And they didn’t release [Igawa], but sent him to AA and AAA in an apparent effort to make him quit, which he didn’t do.

      Kei Igawa was sent to AAA in “an apparent effort to make him quit?” That is absurd.

      While it sounds like something Cashman and his lawyers could have come up with, Igawa was sent to AAA for one reason, and for one reason only: he could not get Major League hitters out (and Mr. Steinbrenner was not inclined to pay Cashman’s fourth starter to sit in his Manahattan apartment for four years).

    32. Evan3457
      November 20th, 2013 | 9:50 pm

      Kamieniecki wrote:

      Pittsburgh certainly wasn’t dumb; Huntingon recognized that Burnett would be more comfortable pitching in a small-market environment, with a potential to become the franchise’s no. 1 starter, and that the G.M. of the New York Yankees, not known for his intelligence, would agree to pay $20 million of Burnett’s salary.

      Only you would fail to realize that if a team makes the decision to dump a player at any price, the value you get back is going to be nil. Only you would fail to remember the times the Yankees did this BEFORE Cashman became GM, and the times after he became GM when George was still in charge, with similar results.

    33. Evan3457
      November 20th, 2013 | 9:53 pm

      McMillan wrote:

      Evan3457 wrote:
      And they didn’t release [Igawa], but sent him to AA and AAA in an apparent effort to make him quit, which he didn’t do.
      Kei Igawa was sent to AAA in “an apparent effort to make him quit?” That is absurd.
      While it sounds like something Cashman and his lawyers could have come up with, Igawa was sent to AAA for one reason, and for one reason only: he could not get Major League hitters out (and Mr. Steinbrenner was not inclined to pay Cashman’s fourth starter to sit in his Manahattan apartment for four years).

      There was a point in time where the Yankees could’ve traded Igawa (the Padres were rumored to have interest), so there was a third option, other than pitching him in the majors, or pitching him in AAA.

      Either it was the Cashman autonomy era or not. If Steinbrenner forced Cashman to keep Igawa and pitch him in the minors, then it’s not Cashman’s decision, is it? Stick to one script, will ya, chump?

    34. McMillan
      November 20th, 2013 | 10:08 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Only you would fail to realize that if a team makes the decision to dump a player at any price, the value you get back is going to be nil.

      Only you would write something that makes so little sense.

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Only you would fail to remember the times the Yankees did this BEFORE Cashman became GM, and the times after he became GM when George was still in charge, with similar results.

      There was not an organizational failure or miscalculation of the magnitude or significance of the signing of A.J. Burnett to an $82.5 million contract BEFORE 2005, or in the Steinbrenner Era.

    35. McMillan
      November 20th, 2013 | 10:18 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      There was a point in time where the Yankees could’ve traded Igawa (the Padres were rumored to have interest), so there was a third option, other than pitching him in the majors, or pitching him in AAA.

      @ Evan3457:
      Pitching him in the Majors was not an option, you idiot.

      San Diego claimed Igawa on waivers; why did Brian “The Smooth Operator and Skilled Swordsman” Cashman fail to work something out with the Padres, rather than have Igawa pitcher for Scranton/Wilkes-Barre from 2007-2011?

    36. Evan3457
      November 21st, 2013 | 12:31 am

      McMillan wrote:

      Evan3457 wrote:
      Only you would fail to realize that if a team makes the decision to dump a player at any price, the value you get back is going to be nil.
      Only you would write something that makes so little sense.

      LOL. What a moron.

      There was not an organizational failure or miscalculation of the magnitude or significance of the signing of A.J. Burnett to an $82.5 million contract BEFORE 2005, or in the Steinbrenner Era.

      If you fail to account for salary inflation over the period, dimwit.
      And if one fails to account for the value of winning the title in 2009, cretin.

    37. PupSockets R Fun
      November 21st, 2013 | 12:39 am

      Evan3457 wrote:

      McMillan wrote:
      Evan3457 wrote:
      Only you would fail to realize that if a team makes the decision to dump a player at any price, the value you get back is going to be nil.
      Only you would write something that makes so little sense.
      LOL. What a moron.

      It’s like he’s never heard of a dictionary…

      fire sale

      2. (Business / Commerce) any instance of offering goods or assets at greatly reduced prices to ensure a quick sale.

      @econimic illiterate
      @whatamaroon

    38. PupSockets R Fun
      November 21st, 2013 | 12:44 am

      McMillan wrote:

      Evan3457 wrote:
      There was a point in time where the Yankees could’ve traded Igawa (the Padres were rumored to have interest), so there was a third option, other than pitching him in the majors, or pitching him in AAA.
      @ Evan3457:
      Pitching him in the Majors was not an option, you idiot.
      San Diego claimed Igawa on waivers; why did Brian “The Smooth Operator and Skilled Swordsman” Cashman fail to work something out with the Padres, rather than have Igawa pitcher for Scranton/Wilkes-Barre from 2007-2011?

      Wow, you’re an idiot.
      No, really, you’re an idiot.

      Because “working something out with the Padres” would’ve involved

      1) The Padres possibly gaining something of value.
      2) Igawa getting what he wanted, a chance to pitch in the majors again.
      3) The Yanks getting little or no value in return, because they’d have been dumping Igawa to get rid of him, and could easily have withdrawn the waiver claim if the Yanks ask for anything of tangible value.
      4) And the Yankees would likely have paid all, or nearly all of Igawa’s major league salary anyway.

      So the Yankees gain nothing, or next to nothing, by trading him. He gets what he wants. The salary cap is not an issue for the team during his time with them. Why should they just give him to the Padres for nothing? To see if he can embarass them by pitching well in a big ballpark in the NL West, in a league without the DH?

    39. Kamieniecki
      November 21st, 2013 | 9:19 pm

      McMillan wrote:

      San Diego claimed Igawa on waivers; why did Brian “The Smooth Operator and Skilled Swordsman” Cashman fail to work something out with the Padres, rather than have Igawa pitcher for Scranton/Wilkes-Barre from 2007-2011?

      PupSockets R Fun wrote:

      Because “working something out with the Padres” would’ve involved

      1) The Padres possibly gaining something of value.
      2) Igawa getting what he wanted, a chance to pitch in the majors again.

      Nonsense. Absolute nonsense.

      PupSockets R Fun wrote:

      3) The Yanks getting little or no value in return, because they’d have been dumping Igawa to get rid of him, and could easily have withdrawn the waiver claim if the Yanks ask for anything of tangible value.
      4) And the Yankees would likely have paid all, or nearly all of Igawa’s major league salary anyway.
      So the Yankees gain nothing, or next to nothing, by trading him.

      You’re arguing against yourself.

      PupSockets R Fun wrote:

      To see if he can embarass them by pitching well in a big ballpark in the NL West, in a league without the DH?

      @ Evan3457:
      A very good point: if it wasn’t for those designated hitters, the 5’11″ Igawa would have been much more successful with his 87 mph fastball than the 2-4 record and 6.66 ERA (1.758 WHIP) he posted from 2007-2011. And with his stuff, he might have dominated October lineups, if Lonn Trost had given him the chance.

      And there are two ‘r’s in “embarrass;” I would’ve thought you’d be very familiar with that word. Get help… I wouldn’t recommend Dr. Charlotte Murphy, however.

    40. Sockpuppets R Us
      November 21st, 2013 | 11:53 pm

      Kamieniecki wrote:

      M
      Nonsense. Absolute nonsense.

      He never horns in on your racket.

      PupSockets R Fun wrote:
      3) The Yanks getting little or no value in return, because they’d have been dumping Igawa to get rid of him, and could easily have withdrawn the waiver claim if the Yanks ask for anything of tangible value.
      4) And the Yankees would likely have paid all, or nearly all of Igawa’s major league salary anyway.
      So the Yankees gain nothing, or next to nothing, by trading him.
      You’re arguing against yourself.

      A very good point: if it wasn’t for those designated hitters, the 5’11″ Igawa would have been much more successful with his 87 mph fastball than the 2-4 record and 6.66 ERA (1.758 WHIP) he posted from 2007-2011. And with his stuff, he might have dominated October lineups, if Lonn Trost had given him the chance.

      So another team, the Padres, put in a claim for a pitcher who had no pontential value. And yet, the Yankees should’ve got something for nothing of value in a trade. Tasty logic there, Sherlock.

      And there are two ‘r’s in “embarrass;” I would’ve thought you’d be very familiar with that word.

      Actually, it’s not surprising YOU caught that, chump.

      Get help… I wouldn’t recommend Dr. Charlotte Murphy, however.

      You’re still the one insisting by implication that your six different personalities are different people. That invites abuse; it would be impolite of me not to accept the invitation.

    41. McMillan
      November 22nd, 2013 | 9:49 pm

      PupSockets R Fun wrote:

      Why should they just give [Igawa] to the Padres for nothing?

      @ Evan3457:
      Because Igawa was worth nothing; a M.L. pitcher who can not retire M.L. hitters is not worth a M.L. salary, or certainly not $4 million per year; whether or not San Diego had recognized this fact as of July of 2007, is ir-rlevant. Cashman did not.

      The Padres were willing to pay a substantial portion of Igawa’s salary, according to some reports, with Brian “God Help The Rest Of Baseball” Cashman having picked up the cost of the $26 million posting fee, and at a time when Igawa had only been a professional baseball player in the U.S. for a matter of months.

      In 2008, Igawa cleared waivers.

      In 2009, Igawa set a Scranton/Wilkes-Barre franchise record for most career wins.

      Cashman on Igawa: “It was a disaster. We failed.”

      Cashman failed twice: in signing Igawa to begin with, and in not negotiating a trade with San Diego or with another ballclub, resulting in $46 million flushed away.

      What do the five worst contracts in the history of a M.L.B. franchise that has been in existence for more than 100 years have in common? Answer: all were offered within the tenure of the same G.M.:

      5 Worst Contracts in New York Yankees History
      http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1406978-5-worst-contracts-in-new-york-yankees-history

      “It was a disaster. We failed.” As he failed with Pavano, and others, and as he would fail again with Burnett, and others.

    42. Kamieniecki
      November 22nd, 2013 | 10:26 pm

      Sockpuppets R Us wrote:

      That invites abuse; it would be impolite of me not to accept the invitation.

      @ Evan3457:
      If you were referring to an abuse of myself – on the contrary; this is all quite amusing and entertaining.

      Someone trying to argue that Cashman is an above-average GM, that the postseason is “(bleeping)” luck, that Kei Igawa should’ve been signed and shouldn’t have been traded, that Weaver and Burnett were “no-brainers,” in the sense Mussina and Sabathia were no-brainers, etc.?

      This is great stuff. And now we have “PupSockets R Fun?” What is a “pupsocket?” Is that something Cashman purchased at T.J. Maxx with an orange toothbrush and black pajama bottoms that he bought so that he’d be more comfortable during sleepovers with Louise Meanwell?

    43. McMillan
      November 23rd, 2013 | 6:12 pm

      Kamieniecki wrote:

      … that Kei Igawa should’ve been signed and shouldn’t have been traded…

      @ Kamieniecki:
      The discovery of a “mechanical flaw” that was offered as the explanation for his demotion to AAA in ’07 was a canard of some kind – there was no “mechanical flaw” – this guy could not pitch at the M.L. level. Period.

      Igawa was worse than Weaver, Pavano, and even Burnett – Igawa was probably the worst acquisition in the history of this organization in that it was $46 million, plus millions in other costs, for absolutely nothing – Pavano could at least get M.L. hitters out when, and if, he felt like it.

      I honestly never thought I would hear someone argue that: 1. Igawa was not one of the worst signings of all acquisitions made by this organization from 1973-2007, if not the worst; or 2. Igawa should not have been traded to any team willing to take on any portion of Igawa’s salary as of Jul., 2007.

      Not only should Igawa not have been signed in the first place, he should have never been given a chance to pitch at the M.L. level, and should have been jettisoned to another team at the first available opportunity to do so, once this team had a chance to evaluate him firsthand against Major League hitters in the U.S.

      That “Kei Igawa” is Japanese for “Can’t Pitch” – should have been another tip-off for Cashman.

    44. Evan3457
      November 24th, 2013 | 4:06 am

      McMillan wrote:

      PupSockets R Fun wrote:
      Why should they just give [Igawa] to the Padres for nothing?
      @ Evan3457:
      Because Igawa was worth nothing; a M.L. pitcher who can not retire M.L. hitters is not worth a M.L. salary, or certainly not $4 million per year; whether or not San Diego had recognized this fact as of July of 2007, is ir-rlevant. Cashman did not.

      A quote from the article you cited:

      …many scouts who tracked him in Japan thought Igawa would be effective as a No. 4 or No. 5 starter.

      But, I guess the writer just made that up.

      The Padres were willing to pay a substantial portion of Igawa’s salary, according to some reports

      Never saw that in print before. Source?

      From a Jayson Stark article:

      At least now, you see, Igawa doesn’t count against their luxury-tax payroll because they were able to dump him off the 40-man roster. But if somebody actually wanted him (not that there’s any indication of that), the Yankees would have to pay virtually his entire salary. And that would pull all those dollars back onto their luxury-tax bill, to the tune of a 40 percent tax on whatever they’re paying.
      In other words, one GM said, “They have huge incentive not to trade him, even if they could. So he’s one of the all-time stuck-in-purgatory cases.”

      Cashman failed twice: in signing Igawa to begin with, and in not negotiating a trade with San Diego or with another ballclub, resulting in $46 million flushed away.

      No, not really, see the quote immediately above.

      What do the five worst contracts in the history of a M.L.B. franchise that has been in existence for more than 100 years have in common? Answer: all were offered within the tenure of the same G.M.:
      1. Bleacher Report? BWAHAHAHAHA.
      2. Blaming the A-Rod re-signing on Cashman? BWAHAHAHA.

      “It was a disaster. We failed.”
      The Igawa signing was a failure? Now, that’s news. Next, you’ll be alerting us all that Lucky Lindy made it.

    45. Evan3457
      November 24th, 2013 | 4:11 am

      Kamieniecki wrote:

      Sockpuppets R Us wrote:

      Someone trying to argue that Cashman is an above-average GM,

      Hasn’t been argued. He might be. I don’t know, really.

      that the postseason is “(bleeping)” luck

      The argument is that the post-season is a crapshoot. Which it is.

      that Kei Igawa should’ve been signed

      …many scouts who tracked him in Japan thought Igawa would be effective as a No. 4 or No. 5 starter.

      and shouldn’t have been traded

      …and now we all know the reason why he shouldn’t have been.

      that Weaver and Burnett were “no-brainers, in the sense Mussina and Sabathia were no-brainers, etc.?

      Nobody’s ever made that argument. Another in an endless series of strawmen by the six of you.

      This is great stuff. And now we have “PupSockets R Fun?” What is a “pupsocket?” Is that something Cashman purchased at T.J. Maxx with an orange toothbrush and black pajama bottoms that he bought so that he’d be more comfortable during sleepovers with Louise Meanwell?

      It’s a mockery of one troll masquerading as six. Duh.

    46. Evan3457
      November 24th, 2013 | 4:15 am

      McMillan wrote:

      Kamieniecki wrote:

      The discovery of a “mechanical flaw”

      blah blah blah…SSDD…

      …many scouts who tracked him in Japan thought Igawa would be effective as a No. 4 or No. 5 starter.

      Nobody’s making the argument that Igawa wasn’t a failure. Who are the six of you arguing with?

      And now, the six of you know why he wasn’t traded.

    47. Evan3457
      November 24th, 2013 | 4:24 am

      Re: Bleacher report.

      Since abandoning the open-source model in 2010, B/R has been the subject of continued criticism for its exploitation of unpaid contributors, its blanket policy prohibiting writers from breaking their own news, and its high-volume production of low-quality, search-optimized slideshow content.[25][26] These critiques found their strongest voice to date in an October 2012 SF Weekly article, in which tech columnist and entrepreneur Vivek Wadhwa was quoted accusing B/R of “dumbing down of the web” with “custom-manufactured garbage.

      Wikipedia isn’t always the most reliable source itself, but it sure tries harder than Bleacher Report.

    48. Kamieniecki
      November 24th, 2013 | 2:58 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Wikipedia isn’t always the most reliable source itself, but it sure tries harder than Bleacher Report.

      @ Evan3457:
      This? From someone who came up with this:
      Evan3457 wrote:

      Well, I’m weighing the ERA, starts and decisions of their #2, #3, and #4 starters from last year in that:

      Burnett 13-9, 4.04
      Pettitte, 14-8, 4.16
      Chamberlain, 9-6 4.75

      If Vazquez starts 34 games, he can reasonably expect somewhere between 23-25 decisions, and taking the average of those ERA and WPCT above, that means something like 14-9 and 15-10 for an ERA of 4.33….

      As a baseline, I think that Javy is capable of something similar, even if his work in key spots is lacking. So he might wind up something like 16-8, even with an ERA of 4.50 or so.

      http://waswatching.com/2010/03/30/the-javier-vazquez-question/

      I’ll take the Bleacher Report in certain instances, which itself has been referenced, or used as a source of information, on waswatching.com. Either way, I think the point was not one contract was pre-2005; maybe Wallace Matthews has written of a contract that was pre-2005 somewhere? Can you name a contract from 1973-2005 that was worse than the ones listed, “pupsocket?”

    49. Evan3457
      November 24th, 2013 | 3:29 pm

      Kamieniecki wrote:

      This? From someone who came up with this:
      Evan3457 wrote:
      Well, I’m weighing the ERA, starts and decisions of their #2, #3, and #4 starters from last year in that:
      Burnett 13-9, 4.04
      Pettitte, 14-8, 4.16
      Chamberlain, 9-6 4.75
      If Vazquez starts 34 games, he can reasonably expect somewhere between 23-25 decisions, and taking the average of those ERA and WPCT above, that means something like 14-9 and 15-10 for an ERA of 4.33….
      As a baseline, I think that Javy is capable of something similar, even if his work in key spots is lacking. So he might wind up something like 16-8, even with an ERA of 4.50 or so.
      http://waswatching.com/2010/03/30/the-javier-vazquez-question/

      The major prediction systems were just as optimistic about Vazquez as I was. Look here for their prediction on Vazquez’ FIP for 2010:

      http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2010/01/18/looking-at-the-2010-yankee-starting-pitchers-through-available-projection-systems/

      All of them predicted his FIP to go up, from 0.49 runs per game to 0.81 runs per game. The average FIP of the Yankees’ 2-3-4 starters in 2009 was 4.33. My prediction for Vazquez would’ve been in the same general range, and considerably worse than any of the analytical prediction systems. Higher than that was his performance for them in 2004, which was a FIP of 4.78.

      Nobody, and I mean nobody, predicted Vazquez would as poorly as he wound up doing, a FIP of 5.59.

      So, notwithstanding your feeble attempts to mock my projection for Vazquez for 2010, it was quite reasonable, and, relatively to the major prediction models, quite conservative.

      Other than that, your mockery, as usual, is spot on, Sybil.

      I’ll take the Bleacher Report in certain instances

      …especially when they agree with your preconceived nonsense.

      Can you name a contract from 1973-2005 that was worse than the ones listed, “pupsocket?”

      Dave Collins was pretty awful. Salaries for players were much lower then, but he produced negative value his one season with the Yanks, and then, to add insult to injury, he was traded along with Fred McGriff (and Mike Morgan as a throw-in!) for Dale Murray and Tom Dodd. Brian Cashman was in high school at the time. The last person listed as Yankee GM at the time Collins was signed was Gene Michael. He had been fired as manager in 1981, and booted upstairs to a nebulous advisor position. Bergesch was director of scouting and vice-president of baseball operations and may have been the de facto GM, although he wasn’t given the title of GM until 1983.

      To be fair to Michael, signing Collins was George’s idea, all the way.

      ==================================
      Mike Witt was traded for in 1990, was granted free agency, and despite the fact that he had negative value for the Yankees after the trade, signed to a 3 year deal for $7.5 million. The major league average salary for the 3 years was a little less than $1 million a year. Witt got hurt the 1st year, missed the 2nd year, and came back the 3rd year to throw 41 innings. He never provided the Yanks with any positive value. He cost them 2.5 times the average salary and about 25 times the minimum salary. It’s quite similar to the Pavano deal.

      The general manager at the time that Witt was traded for and then re-signed?

      Gene Micheal, Sybil.

    50. McMillan
      November 24th, 2013 | 3:31 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Never saw that in print before. Source?

      ESPN. Is that a good enough “source?” There was one team reported to have been willing to assume Igawa’s salary without providing any funds to offset the cost of the posting fee at one point in negotiations over the course of the 2007.

      http://waswatching.com/2010/03/30/the-javier-vazquez-question/

      What were your projections for Igawa?

    51. PHMDen
      November 24th, 2013 | 9:08 pm

      McMillan wrote:

      5 Worst Contracts in New York Yankees History
      http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1406978-5-worst-contracts-in-new-york-yankees-history

      Burnett himself belongs on this list.

    52. Kamieniecki
      November 24th, 2013 | 10:09 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      The major prediction systems were just as optimistic about Vazquez as I was. Look here for their prediction on Vazquez’ FIP for 2010…

      Did the “major prediction systems” use the same methodology:

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Well, I’m weighing the ERA, starts and decisions of their #2, #3, and #4 starters from last year in that:

      Burnett 13-9, 4.04
      Pettitte, 14-8, 4.16
      Chamberlain, 9-6 4.75

      If Vazquez starts 34 games, he can reasonably expect somewhere between 23-25 decisions, and taking the average of those ERA and WPCT above, that means something like 14-9 and 15-10 for an ERA of 4.33….

      LOL.

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Nobody, and I mean nobody, predicted Vazquez would as poorly as he wound up doing…

      If you check the waswatching.com archives, a number of commenters were a hell of a lot more accurate in their predictions than you were… I wonder how they did it?

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Dave Collins was pretty awful.

      A comparison of Dave Collins to Carl Pavano, Sidney Ponson, Kei Igawa, Pedro Feliciano, Roger Clemens, Nick Johnson, A.J. Burnett, etc.? Hysterically feeble.

      Evan3457 wrote:

      The general manager at the time that Witt was traded for and then re-signed?
      Gene Micheal

      Gene Micheal, architect of four world championship teams, has since had his name changed legally to Gene Michael.

      @ Evan3457:
      Speaking of feebleness, what happened to “Sock Puppets R Us?” “PupSockets R Fun?” Was that supposed to be funny?

    53. McMillan
      November 24th, 2013 | 11:49 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      The argument is that the post-season is a crapshoot. Which it is.

      @ Evan3457:
      Well, if YOU say so, then it MUST be true. How many more years, or decades, do you think it might be before Beane is lucky enough to win two straight postseason series with one of the lowest payrolls in M.L.B.?

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Dave Collins was pretty awful. Salaries for players were much lower then, but he produced negative value his one season with the Yanks, and then, to add insult to injury, he was traded along with Fred McGriff (and Mike Morgan as a throw-in!) for Dale Murray and Tom Dodd. Brian Cashman was in high school at the time.

      Bergesch was the G.M. at the time of the trade, NOT Micheal (sic). And Cashman was in high school banging someone’s girlfriend – although I have no idea what that has to do with anything. Dave Collins was not a bad ballplayer.

    54. Evan3457
      November 25th, 2013 | 2:11 am

      McMillan wrote:

      Evan3457 wrote:
      Never saw that in print before. Source?
      ESPN. Is that a good enough “source?” There was one team reported to have been willing to assume Igawa’s salary without providing any funds to offset the cost of the posting fee at one point in negotiations over the course of the 2007.
      http://waswatching.com/2010/03/30/the-javier-vazquez-question/
      What were your projections for Igawa?

      Didn’t have any. He played in Japan.
      I do remember reading things like

      …many scouts who tracked him in Japan thought Igawa would be effective as a No. 4 or No. 5 starter.

      at the time. I was hoping they were right, and that Igawa could hold the #5 job for a year or two until Hughes, Chamberlain and Kennedy were ready for the majors. He didn’t and they were all called up too early partly as a result of that failure.

    55. Evan3457
      November 25th, 2013 | 2:16 am

      Kamieniecki wrote:

      Evan3457 wrote:
      The major prediction systems were just as optimistic about Vazquez as I was. Look here for their prediction on Vazquez’ FIP for 2010…
      Did the “major prediction systems” use the same methodology:

      Does it matter? No, not really, because their projection were worse than mine.

      Nobody, and I mean nobody, predicted Vazquez would as poorly as he wound up doing…

      If you check the waswatching.com archives, a number of commenters were a hell of a lot more accurate in their predictions than you were… I wonder how they did it?

      Emotional reaction/wild-assed guess, most likely.

      Evan3457 wrote:
      Dave Collins was pretty awful.
      A comparison of Dave Collins to Carl Pavano, Sidney Ponson, Kei Igawa, Pedro Feliciano, Roger Clemens, Nick Johnson, A.J. Burnett, etc.? Hysterically feeble.

      Not at all. The signing of Collins did as much damamge, long-term as any of those other signings, including Pavano and Igawa.

      Hysterically feeble response by you, Sybil.
      Evan3457 wrote:
      The general manager at the time that Witt was traded for and then re-signed?
      Gene Micheal
      Gene Micheal, architect of four world championship teams, has since had his name changed legally to Gene Michael.

      Mike Witt is the point. Trading for and re-signing Mike Witt.
      Thanks for playing.
      @ Evan3457:
      Speaking of feebleness, what happened to “Sock Puppets R Us?” “PupSockets R Fun?” Was that supposed to be funny?

      Not funny. Just mockery. But in lieu of our host’s ‘community standards’ thread, I’ve stopped that.

      Wish you would, Sybil.

    56. Evan3457
      November 25th, 2013 | 2:18 am

      McMillan wrote:

      Evan3457 wrote:
      The argument is that the post-season is a crapshoot. Which it is.
      @ Evan3457:
      Well, if YOU say so, then it MUST be true. How many more years, or decades, do you think it might be before Beane is lucky enough to win two straight postseason series with one of the lowest payrolls in M.L.B.?

      I dunno; maybe he should trade luck with Friedman of the Rays. He won two rounds of playoffs, and the pennant, with the lowest payroll in the league in 2008.

    57. Evan3457
      November 25th, 2013 | 2:19 am

      McMillan wrote:

      Bergesch was the G.M. at the time of the trade, NOT Micheal (sic). And Cashman was in high school banging someone’s girlfriend – although I have no idea what that has to do with anything. Dave Collins was not a bad ballplayer.

      And who was the GM at the time Collins was signed? I don’t know.

    58. McMillan
      November 25th, 2013 | 10:39 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      I dunno; maybe he should trade luck with Friedman of the Rays. He won two rounds of playoffs, and the pennant, with the lowest payroll in the league in 2008.

      I thought his name was “Freeman?” Or was that another “typo?”

      Evan3457 wrote:

      And who was the GM at the time Collins was signed? I don’t know.

      Mr. Steinbrenner wanted to re-make the Yankees in 1982, so the G.M. at the time of the Collins signing, acquisition of Griffey, etc., really doesn’t matter.

      What is interesting, however, is that this team was able to win the most regular season baseball games for the decade of the 1980s of all M.L.B. franchises without the same G.M. holding the job for more than 18 consecutive months, spending more money than any other franchise for the decade.

      This demonstrates how an idiot like Brian Cashman can secure so many postseason appearances from 2005-2013 with the highest payrolls in M.L.B. And the starting pitching from 1980-89, and 2005-2013, was not that great overall, and in either case, as I recall…

      The highest payrolls in M.L.B, the most regular season wins, close to league-average starting pitching, and only one A.L. pennant in each period (1980-89, and 2005-13)! Amazing!

    59. Evan3457
      November 26th, 2013 | 7:55 pm

      McMillan wrote:

      Evan3457 wrote:
      I dunno; maybe he should trade luck with Friedman of the Rays. He won two rounds of playoffs, and the pennant, with the lowest payroll in the league in 2008.
      I thought his name was “Freeman?” Or was that another “typo?”

      You can cite as many of my typos as you want; until the end of time if it makes you feel better about yourself. Means nothing.

      What is interesting, however, is that this team was able to win the most regular season baseball games for the decade of the 1980s of all M.L.B. franchises without the same G.M. holding the job for more than 18 consecutive months, spending more money than any other franchise for the decade.
      This demonstrates how an idiot like Brian Cashman can secure so many postseason appearances from 2005-2013 with the highest payrolls in M.L.B.

      Well, no, not really. Under wild card rules in effect from 1995-2011, recasting the standings into the current divisional alignment, and putting the Brewers back in the AL Central, the Yanks win the division in 1980, the Wild Card in 1984, 1985, and 1986, and miss the post-season in 1981, 1982, 1983, 1987, 1988 and 1989. If you allow the 2nd Wild Card, you can add 1983 and 1987. But they still miss the playoff 4 of the 10 years in the decade.

      The Yankees, with Cashman as GM, made the playoffs twice as the Wild Card, and haven’t made it as the 2nd Wild Card yet.

    60. McMillan
      November 26th, 2013 | 10:06 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Well, no, not really. Under wild card rules in effect from 1995-2011, recasting the standings into the current divisional alignment, and putting the Brewers back in the AL Central, the Yanks win the division in 1980, the Wild Card in 1984, 1985, and 1986, and miss the post-season in 1981, 1982, 1983, 1987, 1988 and 1989. If you allow the 2nd Wild Card, you can add 1983 and 1987. But they still miss the playoff 4 of the 10 years in the decade.

      Nonsense.

      You can’t say the 1981 A.L. Champions would have missed the postseason (in a strike-shortened season, no less) by “recasting the standings into the current divisional alignment…” “No mathematician or logician would ever let you get away with that.”

      But even you write that the team would have made the postseason in 6/10 years – right – without a G.M.! By spending money! “Duh.” Who was the G.M. from 1980-89? “Duh.”

      The team had the same record without a G.M. from 1980-89, as it has had without a G.M. from 2005-2013, in terms of: 1. the no. of pennants won; and 2. having won the most regular season games – and did so by having the highest payrolls in each period. “Duh.”

      It doesn’t take a Mozeliak to win the most regular season games with the highest payrolls in M.L.B. – anyone capable of understanding the information on the back of a baseball card can do it. “Duh.”

      Evan3457 wrote:

      1987

      And if George Steinbrenner does not engage in collusion [II], and signs Morris, the 1987-88 years might have been very different – again: signing free agents, and spending money. Even Cashman, with a 1986 Topps baseball card, could have made an offer to Morris.

    61. McMillan
      November 26th, 2013 | 10:54 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      [Friedmann] won two rounds of playoffs, and the pennant, with the lowest payroll in the league in 2008.

      With league-average offense, and one of the best pitching staffs in baseball; imagine that. When teams with a low payroll win a pennant, it’s usually with league-average starting pitching…

    62. Evan3457
      November 27th, 2013 | 12:41 am

      McMillan wrote:

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Nonsense.

      Factually correct, and your reply of “nonsense” is, of course, nonsense itself.

      You can’t say the 1981 A.L. Champions would have missed the postseason (in a strike-shortened season, no less) by “recasting the standings into the current divisional alignment…”

      Yes, I can, and I did. Worst of all for you, Sybil, it’s right.

      “No mathematician or logician would ever let you get away with that.”

      It’s no more or less nonsensical than claiming that having the best combined record for a 10 year span is equivalent to making the playoffs 14 times in 16 years, or 7 times in 9 years from 2005 to 2013.

      But even you write that the team would have made the postseason in 6/10 years

      A gross selective distortion; typical for you, Sybil.
      That’s only under the rules starting from 2012.

      – right – without a G.M.! By spending money! “Duh.” Who was the G.M. from 1980-89? “Duh.”

      And they won…nothing.

      The team had the same record without a G.M. from 1980-89, as it has had without a G.M. from 2005-2013, in terms of: 1. the no. of pennants won; and 2. having won the most regular season games – and did so by having the highest payrolls in each period. “Duh.”

      But not titles, which is more important than either of the other two. And not by a little.

      It doesn’t take a Mozeliak to win the most regular season games with the highest payrolls in M.L.B. – anyone capable of understanding the information on the back of a baseball card can do it. “Duh.”

      And winning the most games in the regular season over a 10 year span is worth…0 titles.

      And if George Steinbrenner does not engage in collusion [II], and signs Morris, the 1987-88 years might have been very different – again:

      And if my grandmother had wheels, she’d be a trolley car.
      And no, I don’t mean that literally, Sybil.

      signing free agents, and spending money. Even Cashman, with a 1986 Topps baseball card, could have made an offer to Morris.

      Assumes that Morris would’ve followed the money, and taken the chaos that comes with the Yankees. He would’ve, probably, but the chaos was building, and free agents would start staying away from the Yankees shortly thereafter because of that, and because they looked like a loser.

    63. Evan3457
      November 27th, 2013 | 12:43 am

      McMillan wrote:

      Evan3457 wrote:
      [Friedmann] won two rounds of playoffs, and the pennant, with the lowest payroll in the league in 2008.
      With league-average offense, and one of the best pitching staffs in baseball; imagine that. When teams with a low payroll win a pennant, it’s usually with league-average starting pitching…

      Considerably better than league average, most of the time.
      But then, we already know this, because teams that win the pennant are usually good at most things. Or they get hot at the things they’re not good at, and stay good at the things they do well. Or they get lucky, and a dynasty gets out of the way for a year.

      Or some combination of the three.