• Yanks Reject Gardner For Phillips

    Posted by on December 12th, 2013 · Comments (51)

    The story.

    What would you have done?

    Comments on Yanks Reject Gardner For Phillips

    1. MJ Recanati
      December 12th, 2013 | 10:06 am

      Phillips is in decline but getting more expensive over the next three years. Unless Cincy was either willing to send money back or send a pitcher along with Phillips, the Yankees were wise to turn down this deal.

    2. #15
      December 12th, 2013 | 11:06 am

      Stick with Gardy… I would really like to see the Yankees throw solid outfield defense and offensive speed on the table this year and Gardy is a big part of that. I think we can tolerate a light hitting 2nd bagger from the organization or the scrap heap.

      Now, if Cincy picks up a big $ chunk…say $3-4 MM/year or throw in a highly ranked pitching prospect, it might get a bit more interesting.

    3. December 12th, 2013 | 11:09 am

      I’m a Gardner fan.

      But, if you’re not going to extend him, and he’s going to walk, then you have to get something in return for him while you can…esp. since the Yankees infield and rotation sucks. No sense keeping him for a year on a team that might not win 85 games.

    4. MJ Recanati
      December 12th, 2013 | 11:23 am

      Steve L. wrote:

      [I]f you’re not going to extend him, and he’s going to walk, then you have to get something in return for him while you can

      Sure, but a straight swap of Gardner for Phillips isn’t the right return.

    5. Greg H.
      December 12th, 2013 | 12:58 pm

      I don’t see the Yanks dealing him without getting a starter back, and I agree with that position.
      a@ Steve L.:
      The offense is definitely better than last year already. Pitching could be an issue and keep them at 85 wins, it will be interesting to watch who steps up.

    6. Kamieniecki
      December 12th, 2013 | 9:43 pm

      MJ Recanati wrote:

      … the Yankees were wise to turn down this deal.

      Cashman’s a wise man.

      When is Brian “One Thing At A Time” Cashman going to get around to working on the worst pitching staff this franchise has had since 1992, when “George Constanza” was promoted to Assistant G.M. at the age of 23 (a promotion that had nothing to do with his father’s longtime personal and business relationships with George Steinbrenner, of course)?

      Cashman’s work this offseason has been impressive, so far:

      1. Sign the best catcher available on the 2014 free agent market to an $85-100 million contract to replace a catcher who retired in 2011.

      2. Sign an outfielder on the free agent market to a $153-169 million contract to play centerfield who was not offered more than $100 million by his former club, and who has hit more than 9 home runs only once in his career.

      3. Allow the best second baseman in franchise history, and a future Hall of Famer, leave via free agency, when all other franchises have been either: 1. locking up such players long-term; or 2. trading such players before they hit free agency.

      4. Sign a 37-year-old outfielder on the free agent market to a 3-year contract in response to the departure of the best second baseman in franchise history via free agency, the same outfielder who was not offered a contract in 2011 because of concern about his age and health.

      5. Offer a contract to the best second baseman on the free agent market to replace the best second baseman in franchise history who departed via free agency for more than 107 million reasons.

    7. Mr. October
      December 12th, 2013 | 10:11 pm

      Greg H. wrote:

      The offense is definitely better than last year already. Pitching could be an issue and keep them at 85 wins, it will be interesting to watch who steps up.

      “… In any other offseason, it would be tough quarrel with a team that added Beltran, McCann and Ellsbury [being a 'winner,'] even if it came at a cost of 283 million Steinbrenner family bucks. But by [losing] Cano, ‘they lost their best player, by far,’ said one exec. ‘So it’s definitely a possibility this [winter] hasn’t been as big a positive as you’d think…’

      ‘At some point, they’ve got to address their pitching,’ said an American League exec. ‘Their rotation is just not real good right now. I’d be shocked, when Tanaka gets out there, if the Yankees aren’t all over him…’”

      http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/10127149/mlb-offseason-winners-losers

      Their bullpen isn’t that great either. How was this team going to get under $189 mil. with Rodriguez’s salary, again? And what do they do if Tanaka isn’t posted or signed?

    8. Evan3457
      December 13th, 2013 | 2:04 pm

      Kamieniecki wrote:

      M
      trading such players before they hit free agency.

      Not allowed by the organizational philosophy. This team refuses to concede even one season.

    9. McMillan
      December 13th, 2013 | 9:40 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Not allowed by the organizational philosophy. This team refuses to concede even one season.

      Nonsense.

    10. Kamieniecki
      December 13th, 2013 | 9:44 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Not allowed by the organizational philosophy. This team refuses to concede even one season.

      But the same “organizational philsophy” allowed the Cano to leave via free agency this year… “Tasty logic there, Sherlock.”

    11. McMillan
      December 13th, 2013 | 11:02 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Not allowed by the organizational philosophy.

      It’s the Yankees’ “organizational philosophy” to offer a player with the talent to become a H.O.F. second baseman for a 41-year old Randy Johnson in 2005, hold onto that player for nine years while it becomes apparent, or should have become apparent, that this is an individual of questionable personal character who could not care less about the history and tradition of the N.Y. Yankees and not sign that player to a long-term contract or trade that player for top pitching prospects or young talent, and then make public comments about the player “caring only about money” once the player declares free agency and before overpaying a Jacoby Ellsbury by tens-of-millions of dollars with the realization that there might have been a miscalculation or misreading about the market, and there might be a team willing to go more than 7 years and more than $200 million?

    12. Evan3457
      December 14th, 2013 | 5:47 am

      McMillan wrote:

      It’s the Yankees’ “organizational philosophy” to offer a player with the talent to become a H.O.F. second baseman for a 41-year old Randy Johnson in 2005, hold onto that player for nine years while it becomes apparent, or should have become apparent, that this is an individual of questionable personal character who could not care less about the history and tradition of the N.Y. Yankees and not sign that player to a long-term contract or trade that player for top pitching prospects or young talent, and then make public comments about the player “caring only about money” once the player declares free agency and before overpaying a Jacoby Ellsbury by tens-of-millions of dollars with the realization that there might have been a miscalculation or misreading about the market, and there might be a team willing to go more than 7 years and more than $200 million?

      Of course they offered Cano for Johnson in 2005. Johnson was the Hall of Fame Caliber veteran starter, coiming off yet another great season for the Diamondbacks. He was still a dominant starting pitcher as off the end of the 2004 season. The Yanks just lost in the worst way possible to the Red Sox in the ALCS, for lack of perhaps one starting pitcher (and lousy clutch hitting up and down the order in games 4 through 6). Robinson Cano had yet to take a major league at bat, and at the time, and was coming off a season in which he had hit very well at AA and not nearly as well at AAA at age 21, and nobody in Major League Baseball regarded him as a HOF 2nd baseman, or even a potential HOF second baseman.

      The proof of that is that the Diamondbacks didn’t take him in the Johnson trade, and neither did the Jon Daniels-led Rangers take him in the trade for Alex Rodriguez the year before. Both teams preferred other prospects.

      So of course the Yanks offered Cano for Johnson. That’s what they’d done since George became owner: trade prospects for established veterans. Even Gene Michael did it when he traded J.T. Snow and two other prospects for Jim Abbott, or three prospects for Terry Mullholland, or two prospects for Jack McDowell. Some of these trades were salary dump deals as well, like the Tino Martinez trade, or the trade for Tim Raines.

      Why should they not have held onto Cano for 9 years? He was being paid well below market value for all of those years except the lost season of 2008.

      Why they didn’t trade him last year has been asked and answered several times: they don’t concede seasons as long as they think they have any reasonable shot at contention. Maybe it would’ve been wise to do that, maybe most other organization would’ve done that, but the Yanks don’t, and they haven’t since 1972 when George bought the team.

      There was no miscalculation or mis-reading the market. They offered $25 million a year for 7 years. They knew they weren’t going to offer him more years. They had been burned badly by the Rodriguez opt-out re-signing, and had already decided this was where they were going to draw the line.

      When the Marines offered essentially the same salary for 9 seasons, the Yankees knew that because they never intended to offer longer deal that Cano was gone, so they acted quickly and used the money to prevent the next most desired players on the free agent board from signing elsewhere. If they had waited until Cano had actually agreed to terms with the Mariners, the price on Ellsbury doesn’t go down. If anything, it’s more likely to go up with the top free agent off the board. And that’s why they acted before Cano did. Unlike the media, they knew what they would and would not do, and they knew Cano was gone.

      In spite of your false erudition and psedo-logic, you really don’t get the idea of “market value”, do you? I mean, is it a surprise that Seattle pushed the panic button, and made a move unlike any they’ve made in the entire history of their team? Yes, it is, but the Yankees knew such a thing was possible. The only real suprise is that they probably assumed it would come from a team like the Dodgers, not the Mariners.

    13. Kamieniecki
      December 14th, 2013 | 9:45 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      In spite of your false erudition and psedo-logic, you really don’t get the idea…

      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 [in 2010]…

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

    14. Evan3457
      December 15th, 2013 | 3:49 am

      Kamieniecki wrote:

      Evan3457 wrote:
      In spite of your false erudition and psedo-logic, you really don’t get the idea…
      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 [in 2010]…
      http://waswatching.com/2010/03/30/the-javier-vazquez-question/

      You still cite this as something I should be ashamed of.

      What a joke. On you.

    15. McMillan
      December 15th, 2013 | 8:52 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Of course they offered Cano for Johnson in 2005. Johnson was the Hall of Fame Caliber veteran starter, coiming off yet another great season for the Diamondbacks… Robinson Cano had yet to take a major league at bat, and at the time…

      The proof of that is that the Diamondbacks didn’t take him in the Johnson trade, and neither did the Jon Daniels-led Rangers take him in the trade for Alex Rodriguez the year before. Both teams preferred other prospects.

      So of course the Yanks offered Cano for Johnson. That’s what they’d done since George became owner: trade prospects for established veterans….

      This is all so idiotic, I don’t have the patience to reply to it. An organization is not supposed to understand what it has in its own farm system, in terms of prospects or talent, better than other organizations such as Arizona and Texas? “Of course they offered Cano?” Why offer Cano, when Arizona demonstrated a willingess to accept a package that did not include Cano, or a lesser package, and eventually did so?

      And that wasn’t the first time the son of Harness Racing Hall of Fame Legend John Cashman tried to trade a future Hall of Fame second baseman and perennial All-Star for a pitcher in this 40s (Moyer). Idiotic.

    16. Kamieniecki
      December 15th, 2013 | 9:59 pm

      @ Evan3457:
      Evan3457 wrote:

      You still cite this as something I should be ashamed of.
      What a joke. On you.

      It’s often more efficient than discredting almost everything you have written in a lengthy post, line-by-line. Once again, great job with projecting Vazquez’s final numbers for the 2010 season.

      Evan3457 wrote:

      That’s what [the Yankees have] done since [George Steinbrenner] became owner: trade prospects for established veterans.

      One difference is that the Yankees had much more success in trading prospects for established veterans from 1973-1998, than from 1998-2014. True to your m.o., you will cite questionable trades made from 1973-1998 or by Gene “Micheal,” but the fact of the matter is, that there is no comparison between these two periods on this basis… The rest of your post is spot on as well.

    17. PHMDen
      December 16th, 2013 | 10:21 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Why they didn’t trade him last year has been asked and answered several times: they don’t concede seasons as long as they think they have any reasonable shot at contention.

      I don’t recall an “organizational or corporate philosophy” getting in the way of the Yankees signing a future Hall of Fame, home-grown middle infielder, in his 20s, to a 10-year, $189M contract in 2001. The same team couldn’t sign another future Hall of Fame home-grown middle infielder, in his 20s, to a 10-year $210M contract in 2011, or 10 years later? Why not?

    18. McMillan
      December 17th, 2013 | 12:34 am

      PHMDen wrote:

      The same team couldn’t sign another future Hall of Fame home-grown middle infielder, in his 20s, to a 10-year $210M contract in 2011, or 10 years later? Why not?

      Cashman thought it made much more sense in 2011 to not lock up Cano as the organization had done with Jeter, not trade Cano to address needs at the minor league and Major League levels, and to go into the 2014 with the worst starting rotation the team has had since 1992 and with Dean Anna playing second base. That’s why.

    19. Mr. October
      December 17th, 2013 | 12:45 am

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Even Gene Michael did it when he traded… three prospects for Terry Mullholland…

      “… the Yankees erased some of the doubts about their rotation by acquiring Mulholland from Philadelphia for reliever Bobby Munoz and two Class AA players.

      … it was a splendid deal for the Yankees because they made their rotation more formidable by adding the left-handed Mulholland and because they did not sacrifice their prized Class AAA pitching prospects.

      Although the Phillies had asked for Hitchcock, Hutton or Wickman with Munoz, [Michael] would not relinquish them and instead surrendered left-hander Karp and second baseman Jordan… ”

      http://www.nytimes.com/1994/02/10/sports/baseball-yankees-strengthen-rotation-with-mulholland.html

      Not a bad trade; Michael gave up nothing for Mulholland, and Hitchcock was used to acquire Tino Martinez, Jeff Nelson, and Jim Mecir, from Seattle – a trade the quality of which Cashman makes every day.

    20. McMillan
      December 17th, 2013 | 12:56 am

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Even Gene Michael did it when he traded… two prospects for Jack McDowell.

      And, ironically, on Dec. 14, 1994, Gene Michael’s acquisition of McDowell also involved prospects that did not ultimately succeed at the Major League level. Has Brian “The Stalking Horse” Cashman acquired a Jack McDowell in such a trade since 1998? Or does ne need a few more years?

    21. Mr. October
      December 17th, 2013 | 1:20 am

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Even Gene Michael did it when he traded J.T. Snow and two other prospects for Jim Abbott…

      Another good point: I had forgotten Jim Abbott was 41 years old when Gene Michael traded JT Snow for him; for some reason I remembered Abbott being 24.

    22. Evan3457
      December 17th, 2013 | 1:56 am

      PHMDen wrote:

      Evan3457 wrote:
      Why they didn’t trade him last year has been asked and answered several times: they don’t concede seasons as long as they think they have any reasonable shot at contention.
      I don’t recall an “organizational or corporate philosophy” getting in the way of the Yankees signing a future Hall of Fame, home-grown middle infielder, in his 20s, to a 10-year, $189M contract in 2001. The same team couldn’t sign another future Hall of Fame home-grown middle infielder, in his 20s, to a 10-year $210M contract in 2011, or 10 years later? Why not?

      Because they decided, and rightly so, that the first 10 year contract given to a player over the age of 30 was an enormous error.

    23. Evan3457
      December 17th, 2013 | 2:21 am

      McMillan wrote:

      This is all so idiotic, I don’t have the patience to reply to it. An organization is not supposed to understand what it has in its own farm system, in terms of prospects or talent, better than other organizations such as Arizona and Texas? “Of course they offered Cano?” Why offer Cano, when Arizona demonstrated a willingess to accept a package that did not include Cano, or a lesser package, and eventually did so?
      And that wasn’t the first time the son of Harness Racing Hall of Fame Legend John Cashman tried to trade a future Hall of Fame second baseman and perennial All-Star for a pitcher in this 40s (Moyer). Idiotic.

      The only thing idiotic here is your failure to understand the obvious. Boy, when you’re called and you have nothing in your hand, you sure get angry real fast.

      At the time the Yankees were offering Cano around, he had given no indications of the hitter he’d eventually become. Some prospects do that. They grow way beyond what’s projected for them, even the most optimistic projections for them.

      Nobody was clamoring to acquire Cano, not even Beane, Freidman, Epstein or Dombrowski. If they’re so superior as judges of talent, why didn’t they twig to the fact that Cano was “a future Hall of Famer”?

      I’ll tell you why: because no one thought he was a future Hall of Famer at the time; not the Yankees, not any of their competitors.

      The Diamondbacks didn’t show a “willingness to accept a lesser package”. That’s 100% pure hindsight bullspit. The Yanks made Cano available among other prospects who were more highly regarded at the time. The Diamondbacks chose what they thought was the best package. They chose poorly, and their failure to chose wisely doesn’t make Cashman an idiot for offering Cano.

      Media reports linked him to trade speculation or the possible availability of players such as Ken Griffey Jr., Troy Glaus, Freddy Garcia, Jamie Moyer and Russ Ortiz.

      http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/yankees/imagine-lineup-yanks-dealt-cano-04-article-1.1380076#ixzz2ni3YkA6O

      Is that your evidence the Yanks tried to trade Cano for Moyer? They also tried to trade him for Griffy, Glaus, Freddy Garcia and Russ Ortiz. And all of this dates before 2004. Idiotic to connect him directly to Moyer alone.

      Here’s the Baseball Prospectus comment on Cano in their 2004 edition, written after the 2003 season:

      His age and organizational affection for him mark Cano as a prospect, but there’s not much here. Forget how BP likes plate discipline and Cano doesn’t walk. Having been moved off shortstop in 2003, he’s a second baseman who isn’t fast and hasn’t hit for very high averages. His prospect status is almost entirely a scouting thing, where they like the way he looks at the plate and project he’ll fill out his six-foot frame with time. That might happen, but for now Cano looks like he needs at least one full season in Double-A and lots of improvement. Trade bait.”

      …and why was he trade bait? Because the Yanks had Jeter at short, and 26-year old Alfonso Soriano at 2nd. It was only AFTER they traded Soriano in the A-Rod deal that a spot was opened for Cano to fill. But the Yanks had no intention of playing Cano at 2nd over Soriano, and there was no good reason, AT THAT TIME, to have such intentions.

      I defy you to find anywhere on the internet a scouting report written before 2005 calling Cano a Future Hall of Famer. Nobody, repeat, NOBODY in baseball, not the Yankees, nor any of the allegedly superior GMs, thought of Cano as a potential Hall of Famer. If they had, they would’ve traded for him when the Yanks made him available. But they didn’t, and for a simple reason: he wasn’t a potential Hall of Famer in 2003, or even 2004. The fact that he played way above his projection att he time doesn’t mean any of the talent evaluators were wrong, not even Cashman. It happens to some players; not many, a very select few.

    24. Evan3457
      December 17th, 2013 | 2:26 am

      Kamieniecki wrote:

      It’s often more efficient than discredting almost everything you have written in a lengthy post, line-by-line. Once again, great job with projecting Vazquez’s final numbers for the 2010 season.

      Still laughable you think this means much of anything at all, because people with much more sophisticated projection systems, and much more experience at it, missed by even more than I did. And I pointed that out to you in a previous post.

      So I reject your opinion in this matter, and rightly so.

      One difference is that the Yankees had much more success in trading prospects for established veterans from 1973-1998, than from 1998-2014.

      No, they had lots of success in trading prospects for veterans from 1973-1981. They did a terrible job of it from 1982-1988.

      True to your m.o., you will cite questionable trades made from 1973-1998 or by Gene “Micheal,”

      Yes, I do, because it’s relevant to the issue at hand, which is the organizational philosophy to trade prospects for veterans goes all the way back to 1973, and sometimes the results have been great, and sometimes they’ve been disastrous.

      your post is spot on.

      Thank you. I agree.

    25. Evan3457
      December 17th, 2013 | 2:32 am

      McMillan wrote:

      Cashman thought it made much more sense in 2011 to not lock up Cano as the organization had done with Jeter,

      Maybe they think, for several reasons, Cano is not Jeter. Chief among them being that Jeter was 25 when they signed him to his 10-year contract, whereas Cano is already 31.

      not trade Cano to address needs at the minor league and Major League levels

      Asked and answered; not allowed under the team’s long-standing philosophy of not conceding a season, now over 40 years old.

      and to go into the 2014 with the worst starting rotation the team has had since 1992

      The rotation is not set in stone, so Cashman isn’t “thinking” that at all.

      and with Dean Anna playing second base. That’s why.

      Not very likely. An emergency stopgap pickup.

    26. Evan3457
      December 17th, 2013 | 2:40 am

      Mr. October wrote:

      Evan3457 wrote:
      Even Gene Michael did it when he traded… three prospects for Terry Mullholland…
      “… the Yankees erased some of the doubts about their rotation by acquiring Mulholland from Philadelphia for reliever Bobby Munoz and two Class AA players.
      … it was a splendid deal for the Yankees because they made their rotation more formidable by adding the left-handed Mulholland and because they did not sacrifice their prized Class AAA pitching prospects.

      So splendid that Mullholland went 6-7 with a 6.49 ERA for the Yanks. He never had an ERA under 4.00 as a starting pitcher again. In dealing for Mullholland, Michael made the classic trade error of trading for a veteran with a prior established level of so-so performance coming off a career year. Does that make him an idiot? No, it just means he made a trade for a pitcher who actually hurt the Yankees in 1994.

      Not a bad trade; Michael gave up nothing for Mulholland, and Hitchcock was used to acquire Tino Martinez, Jeff Nelson, and Jim Mecir, from Seattle – a trade the quality of which Cashman makes every day.

      A salary dump deal, pure and simple. The Mariners needed to not give Martinez a big contract that he was coming due for. He was just about to become very expensive, and they signed the less expensive (2 years, $2.5 million) Paul Sorrento to take his place.

    27. Evan3457
      December 17th, 2013 | 2:48 am

      Mr. October wrote:

      Evan3457 wrote:
      Even Gene Michael did it when he traded J.T. Snow and two other prospects for Jim Abbott…
      Another good point: I had forgotten Jim Abbott was 41 years old when Gene Michael traded JT Snow for him; for some reason I remembered Abbott being 24.

      Abbott was 26 when he was traded to the Yanks.

      Abbott produced negative WAR in his 2 years with the Yanks, no-hitter notwithstanding. Snow was moderately successful after the Yanks traded him. His WAR was low because those years were right in the heart of the steroid era, so he was competing with many puffed up first baseman, but he was still plus WAR in most of the next 6 years, averaging 21 HR and 91 RBI, and was more valueable than Abbott.

    28. Evan3457
      December 17th, 2013 | 2:51 am

      McMillan wrote:

      Gene Michael’s acquisition of McDowell also involved prospects that did not ultimately succeed at the Major League level. Has Brian “The Stalking Horse” Cashman acquired a Jack McDowell in such a trade since 1998?

      You mean pitchers who pitched well in the regular season, against but gagged it up in the playoffs? As you’ve pointed out, several.

    29. Evan3457
      December 17th, 2013 | 2:52 am

      Hey, Sybil!
      Evan3457 wrote:

      and 91 RBI, and was more valueable than Abbott.

      Try not to premature over that one.

    30. PHMDen
      December 17th, 2013 | 10:34 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      @ Evan3457:
      [The Yankees did not offer Cano a 10-year contract in 2011 because] they decided, and rightly so, that the first 10 year contract given to a player over the age of 30 was an enormous error.

      That’s a great answer, and there’s only one problem with it: Robinson Cano was not over the age of 30 in 2011.

      http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/c/canoro01.shtml

    31. McMillan
      December 17th, 2013 | 10:52 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Boy, when you’re called and you have nothing in your hand, you sure get angry real fast.

      When was this?

      Evan3457 wrote:

      At the time [Cashman was] offering Cano around, he had given no indications of the hitter he’d eventually become.

      @ Evan3457:
      Ridiculous.

      You’re trying to exuse Cashman’s attempt to include a prospect that would go on to become the best second baseman in the history of this franchise and one on track for Hall of Fame induction at the age of 32 in more than one trade for a pitcher in his 40s in the mid 2000s?

      Evan3457 wrote:

      I’ll tell you why: because no one thought he was a future Hall of Famer at the time; not the Yankees, not any of their competitors.

      LOL – there are those words again: “at the time.” I’ve read enough nonsense for one night…

      @ Evan3457:
      http://deadspin.com/5845140/the-photos-of-yankees-gm-brian-cashman-that-broke-up-a-marriage

    32. PHMDen
      December 17th, 2013 | 10:56 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Abbott was 26 when he was traded to the Yanks.

      @ Evan3457:
      No he wasn’t. Have you ever been correct with a single fact?

      http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/a/abbotji01.shtml

    33. Kamieniecki
      December 17th, 2013 | 11:43 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Still laughable you think this means much of anything at all, because people with much more sophisticated projection systems…

      You call averaging the statistics of three starting pitchers to arrive at a projection for a starter acquired in a trade “a sophisticated projection system?” You’re not really a high school teacher in his 50s, are you? You’re really a high school student in his 50s, aren’t you?

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Abbott produced negative WAR in his 2 years with the Yanks…

      Is this according to M.J.’s calculations, or your own?

      PHMDen wrote:

      Have you ever been correct with a single fact?

      Isn’t the answer to that question obvious?

    34. Mr. October
      December 18th, 2013 | 12:00 am

      Evan3457 wrote:

      A salary dump deal, pure and simple. The Mariners needed to not give Martinez a big contract that he was coming due for. He was just about to become very expensive, and they signed the less expensive (2 years, $2.5 million) Paul Sorrento to take his place.

      Nonsense, pure and simple. That the Mariners may or may not have been intent on not paying Martinez’s salary has nothing to do with the facts that Michael was able to pull the trade off without including Posada, and that Cashman has not pulled off an equivalent trade in 16 years.

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Try not to premature over that one.

      Very nice. You have about as much class and maturity as the Yankees’ GM. Grow up.

    35. Evan3457
      December 18th, 2013 | 2:22 am

      PHMDen wrote:

      Evan3457 wrote:
      @ Evan3457:
      [The Yankees did not offer Cano a 10-year contract in 2011 because] they decided, and rightly so, that the first 10 year contract given to a player over the age of 30 was an enormous error.
      That’s a great answer, and there’s only one problem with it: Robinson Cano was not over the age of 30 in 2011.
      http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/c/canoro01.shtml

      There’s only one problem with that, and that’s that Cano was already signed to 2013, so they didn’t have to sign him in 2011.

      Next.

    36. Evan3457
      December 18th, 2013 | 2:26 am

      McMillan wrote:

      Evan3457 wrote:
      Boy, when you’re called and you have nothing in your hand, you sure get angry real fast.
      When was this?

      No point in telling you, because you’ll never concede even when you’re obviously, overwhelmingly wrong.

      At the time [Cashman was] offering Cano around, he had given no indications of the hitter he’d eventually become.
      @ Evan3457:
      Ridiculous.

      For that response alone, you should mocked and jeered right off the internet. Forever.

      You’re trying to exuse Cashman’s attempt to include a prospect that would go on to become the best second baseman in the history of this franchise and one on track for Hall of Fame induction at the age of 32 in more than one trade for a pitcher in his 40s in the mid 2000s?

      There’s nothing to excuse. He was not the best 2nd baseman in franchise history when they offered him, nobody, on the Yankees or any other team, thought he was going to become that, and they already had an All-Star caliber 2nd baseman at the time. The very definition of trade bait.

      LOL – there are those words again: “at the time.” I’ve read enough nonsense for one night…

      Of course you have; all you have is hindsight.
      Here’s a link just for you:
      http://media.tumblr.com/2f4708cd0a6c958bf6fcb35d74085b98/tumblr_inline_mnmgywQWae1qz4rgp.jpg

    37. Evan3457
      December 18th, 2013 | 2:29 am

      PHMDen wrote:

      Evan3457 wrote:
      Abbott was 26 when he was traded to the Yanks.
      @ Evan3457:
      No he wasn’t. Have you ever been correct with a single fact?
      http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/a/abbotji01.shtml

      Then you’re just as wrong as me. Sybil, because he was 25 when they traded for him.

      Born: Sept. 19, 1967
      Traded to Yankees: Dec. 6, 1992.

      LOL! Take your faux superiority and shove it.

    38. Evan3457
      December 18th, 2013 | 2:32 am

      Mr. October wrote:

      Evan3457 wrote:
      A salary dump deal, pure and simple. The Mariners needed to not give Martinez a big contract that he was coming due for. He was just about to become very expensive, and they signed the less expensive (2 years, $2.5 million) Paul Sorrento to take his place.
      Nonsense, pure and simple. That the Mariners may or may not have been intent on not paying Martinez’s salary has nothing to do with the facts that Michael was able to pull the trade off without including Posada, and that Cashman has not pulled off an equivalent trade in 16 years.

      Nonsense reply, pure and simple. The Mariners would never have made Martinez available if they had the money for him AND Martinez AND Griffey AND Johnson and others they considerd harder to replace.

      Very nice. You have about as much class and maturity as the Yankees’ GM. Grow up.

      Says the troll who disguises himself as six different personalities to make it look like he isn’t so very much all alone in his crank opinions.

      I’ll take that under advisement, Sybil.

    39. McMillan
      December 18th, 2013 | 9:46 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      There’s only one problem with that, and that’s that Cano was already signed to 2013, so they didn’t have to sign him in 2011.

      Next.

      Stupid. That does not mean Robinson Cano could not have been locked up long-term in his late twenties.

      Enjoy watching Brian Roberts and Kelly Johnson at second base, and the revolving door at D.H. with Beltran, Jeter, Ellsbury, McCann, Rodriguez, Soriano, etc., and all of the hours you’re going to spend whining about the “massive injury pandemic of 2014,” as you did throughout 2013.

      @ Evan3457:
      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2259036/Brian-Cashman-told-mistress-Louise-Neathway-Yankees-manager-help-child-custody-case.html

      I love the picture of Cashman incognito, and meeting Louise Meanwell in her hallway at 7.31pm on January 19, don’t you?

    40. PHMDen
      December 18th, 2013 | 9:52 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      There’s only one problem with that, and that’s that Cano was already signed to 2013, so they didn’t have to sign him in 2011.

      Next.

      Have you ever heard of a contract being extended or re-negotiated? Probably not…

      McMillan wrote:

      I love the picture of Cashman incognito, and meeting Louise Meanwell in her hallway at 7.31pm on January 19, don’t you?

      I didn’t know Louise Meanwell was so much taller than Cashman; leaning up against a wall, she’s taller than him.

    41. McMillan
      December 18th, 2013 | 10:01 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      No point in telling you, because you’ll never concede even when you’re obviously, overwhelmingly wrong.

      @ Evan3457:
      Then provide the quote, Sybil – that’s what those little buttons captioned “Quote” (to the right of the little buttons captioned “Reply”) are for.

      What was I wrong about?

    42. PHMDen
      December 18th, 2013 | 10:11 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Abbott was 26 when he was traded to the Yanks.

      Evan3457 wrote:

      … [Abbott] was 25 when [the Yanks] traded for him.

      Born: Sept. 19, 1967
      Traded to Yankees: Dec. 6, 1992.
      LOL! Take your faux superiority and shove it.

      Make up your mind: was he 25 or 26? Either way, Abbott was younger than Kei Igawa was when Cashman flushed $46 million on him.

    43. Evan3457
      December 19th, 2013 | 12:33 am

      McMillan wrote:

      Evan3457 wrote:
      There’s only one problem with that, and that’s that Cano was already signed to 2013, so they didn’t have to sign him in 2011.
      Next.
      Stupid. That does not mean Robinson Cano could not have been locked up long-term in his late twenties.

      At the time, Boras was his agent. It would’ve taken a 10 year deal, then, at the age of 29. Not happing post A-Rod. But keep wishcasting.

      Enjoy watching Brian Roberts and Kelly Johnson at second base, and the revolving door at D.H. with Beltran, Jeter, Ellsbury, McCann, Rodriguez, Soriano, etc., and all of the hours you’re going to spend whining about the “massive injury pandemic of 2014,” as you did throughout 2013.

      Oh, yeah, the dropoff from Cano to Roberts/Johnson/whoever will be huge. But the gains up and down the roster from 2013 should be bigger.

      <blockquote?
      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/whatever

      http://www.exotic-footwear.ru/big_jpg/clown.jpg

    44. Evan3457
      December 19th, 2013 | 12:35 am

      PHMDen wrote:

      Evan3457 wrote:
      There’s only one problem with that, and that’s that Cano was already signed to 2013, so they didn’t have to sign him in 2011.
      Next.
      Have you ever heard of a contract being extended or re-negotiated?

      You mean, like CC after 2011? Or A-Rod after 2007?

      Nope, never heard of that. Keep whining about them, though.

    45. Evan3457
      December 19th, 2013 | 12:35 am

      McMillan wrote:

      Evan3457 wrote:
      No point in telling you, because you’ll never concede even when you’re obviously, overwhelmingly wrong.
      @ Evan3457:
      Then provide the quote, Sybil – that’s what those little buttons captioned “Quote” (to the right of the little buttons captioned “Reply”) are for.
      What was I wrong about?

      Damn near everything.

    46. Evan3457
      December 19th, 2013 | 12:37 am

      PHMDen wrote:

      Evan3457 wrote:
      Abbott was 26 when he was traded to the Yanks.
      Evan3457 wrote:
      … [Abbott] was 25 when [the Yanks] traded for him.
      Born: Sept. 19, 1967
      Traded to Yankees: Dec. 6, 1992.
      LOL! Take your faux superiority and shove it.
      Make up your mind: was he 25 or 26?

      Make up your minds, Sybil; was he 24 or 25?

    47. Mr. October
      December 19th, 2013 | 12:48 am

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Oh, yeah, the dropoff from Cano to Roberts/Johnson/whoever will be huge. But the gains up and down the roster from 2013 should be bigger.

      Wrong. As is always the case.

      “… Cano was worth 7.6 Wins Above Replacement in 2013. McCann, Beltran, and Ellsbury were worth 10.4 bWAR combined. Losing Cano wipes out most of the gains made by signing the other three players, and while Cano will make $24 million in Seattle next year, the Yankees will pay the other three $53 million…”

      http://waswatching.com/2013/12/18/rany-jazayerlis-the-new-yankees-normal/

    48. Mr. October
      December 19th, 2013 | 12:57 am

      Evan3457 wrote:

      It would’ve taken a 10 year deal, then, at the age of 29. Not happing post A-Rod. But keep wishcasting.

      Boston could sign one of the best second baseman in MLB to an 8 yr/$100 mil. contract extension in his late 20s with a $160 mil. payroll, but New York couldn’t sign the best second baseman n MLB to a 10 yr contract extension in his late 20s with a $210 mil. payroll.

      @ PHMDen:
      Why do you waste your time?

    49. McMillan
      December 19th, 2013 | 1:36 am

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Damn near everything.

      @ Evan3457:
      So much so, that you cannot provide a single quote. I’ve already taken all of your limbs, Black Knight, do you want to lose your head too?

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKhEw7nD9C4

      Evan3457 wrote:

      You mean, like CC after 2011? Or A-Rod after 2007?

      Sabathia was a 31 year-old pitcher given a contract extension with an A.A.V. of approx. $24 million per year through 2017, and Rodriguez was 31 years old in 2007. What has any of this got to do with signing Cano long-term in his mid-to-late 20s? What is your major malfunction, numbnuts?

    50. Kamieniecki
      December 19th, 2013 | 2:12 am

      PHMDen wrote:

      I didn’t know Louise Meanwell was so much taller than Cashman; leaning up against a wall, she’s taller than him.

      … And Incognito Cashman is wearing his work boots.

    51. McMillan
      December 19th, 2013 | 2:26 am

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Here’s the Baseball Prospectus comment on Cano in their 2004 edition, written after the 2003 season:

      @ Evan3457:
      Who gives a damn what Baseball Prospectus had to write about Robinson Cano in 2004???? What is wrong with you? Aside from your Cashman-level I.Q.?

    Leave a reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.