Yankees/MLB Hot Stove Report: Oswalt, Darvish & Nakajima
by Travis G on Jan 3, 2012 7:26 PM EST
in New York Yankees Rumors
Email
PrintIn addition to Edwin Jackson and Matt Garza, the Yankees are reportedly showing interest in Roy Oswalt. Finally. Why wouldn't they take a chance on him if it was only one year?
- The Cubs have asked for Jesus Montero and one of Manny Banuelos or Dellin Betances for Garza.
- The Yankees "secret" bid for Yu Darvish has apparently been sniffed out by Jon Heyman, who says it was only $15M. Amazing to think they bid $11M more for Kei Igawa.
- Japanese shortstop Hiroyuki Nakajima is willing to be a utility infielder in MLB, but he still wants a good contract. The Yanks are apparently not reaching his idea of "good" so far. Jack Curry thinks a deal won't get done (he'd also have to pass a physical by the 5 p.m. Friday deadline).
- If you want to see hockey at Yankee Stadium, you'll have to wait until at least 2016.
- A good read on the farm system at TYA.
- The Cubs inked OF Reed Johnson to a one-year, $1.2M contract.
- Are the A's insane? They've agreed to pay OF Coco Crisp $14M for the next two years.
210 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Why would the A's trade away their two best young, cheap pitchers
but then pay old man Coco all that money to basically be a warm body until the Next Great A’s Team. Billy Beane everyone.
I have no idea why the Yankees even put in a bid if they’re not willing to give him playing time or money. What was the point? It wasn’t to block anyone. It wasn’t to help get Darvish. It wasn’t to replace Eduardo Nunez after being traded.
I'm just glad
they kept Crisp away from the Giants. They could sign another lefthanded reliever with that kind of money!
The above comment is not affiliated with the San Francisco Giants, is not based on a secret source of team information, and may contain personal opinion.
"I'll never forget San Francisco and all those beautiful moments."- Andres Torres
by natteringnabob on Jan 3, 2012 10:17 PM EST up reply actions
It's a terrific signing.
You trade away your cheap young pitchers cuz they have the most worth. Get the most value you can back with your most valuable assets. They currently only have 1 OF on the MLB roster, so they needed some more bodies. Since no FAs will even consider going to Oakland due to the stadium and facilities, when a guy like Coco Crisp WANTS to return you jump on that signing.
The hope is to have prospects ready to be competitive by 2015 when, supposedly, the new San Jose stadium is being built.
DWTDD
wow the A's are insane
"Everything looks nicer when you win. The girls are prettier, the cigars taste better. The trees are greener."
by NJ Champ on Jan 3, 2012 7:40 PM EST via Android app reply actions
Agreed.
Beane has never been good at spending money. With this said, they have lots of young arms to develop and a great defensive CF can help in that. Crisp also strikes me as a good clubhouse presence. This might be about giving the kids a veteran on the field.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 3, 2012 8:05 PM EST up reply actions
entering the second 5 years
of their 5 year plan.
The above comment is not affiliated with the San Francisco Giants, is not based on a secret source of team information, and may contain personal opinion.
"I'll never forget San Francisco and all those beautiful moments."- Andres Torres
by natteringnabob on Jan 3, 2012 10:17 PM EST up reply actions
I’m not sure what is so hard to understand about “5 year plans” not working out. Let’s reverse roles. 2 years ago at this time all I heard was how great the “Killer B’s” were gonna be. 3 top flight starters. Let’s say the Yankees had a $40M payroll, and basically the Franchise for the next 5 years hinged on all of those B’s not only making the big leagues, but dominating. Well Brackman is a bust and the jury is still out on the other 2.
All I’m saying is you line up a group of top prospects and when they don’t all pan out your 5 year plan fizzles.
DWTDD
how did Braden, Anderson, Gonzalez, Cahill fizzle?
People were clamoring for them and would be for the other two if they didn’t just have injuries. The pitchers worked out, the A’s just had pretty much nothing around them at all.
...
Montero and Manny or Betances for Garza? Matt Garza?
Geeeeet the fuckouttahere!!!
Yankees, Knicks, Giants
You introduced me / to my mind
and left me wanting / you and your kind
My life is free now / my life is clear
I love you sweet leaf / though you can't hear
You gave to me / a new belief
and soon the world / will love you sweet leaf
by Benny Blanco from the BriX on Jan 3, 2012 8:07 PM EST reply actions 4 recs
Amen to that
"Talent is God-given; be humble. Fame is man-given; be grateful. Conceit is self-given; be careful." John Wooden
Montero >> Garza
I wouldn’t even do it straight up, even with the nation wide conspiracy to pretend that 22 year olds can’t improve on defense.
Most arguments are really about context.
Noticed. That too. Good to see
Follow me on twitter @nyybrandonc
Co-Manager/Writer for Pinstripe Alley, Editor/Writer for Blueshirt Banter
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
"Every day is a great day for hockey."
by Brandon C. on Jan 3, 2012 8:36 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
You made a grammar error
I'll do whatever it takes to win games, whether it's sitting on a bench waving a towel, handing a cup of water to a teammate, or hitting the game-winning shot.- Kobe Bryant
A.J. Burnett's only fan!
I noticed. That too.
Contributing writer for Pinstripe Alley.
Follow me on Twitter @frankiecamp48
by Frank Campagnola on Jan 3, 2012 9:13 PM EST up reply actions
Ryping in iPhone is still difficult for me.
Follow me on twitter @nyybrandonc
Co-Manager/Writer for Pinstripe Alley, Editor/Writer for Blueshirt Banter
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
"Every day is a great day for hockey."
by Brandon C. on Jan 4, 2012 3:02 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
Oh, wow.
Nicely done.
sixseasonsandamovie
♬P-p-pocket full of Hawthrones.♪
by noonoo on Jan 4, 2012 2:40 PM EST via iPhone app up reply actions
Quiet you!
Follow me on twitter @nyybrandonc
Co-Manager/Writer for Pinstripe Alley, Editor/Writer for Blueshirt Banter
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
"Every day is a great day for hockey."
by Brandon C. on Jan 5, 2012 2:44 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Why wrong?
Follow me on twitter @nyybrandonc
Co-Manager/Writer for Pinstripe Alley, Editor/Writer for Blueshirt Banter
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
"Every day is a great day for hockey."
by Brandon C. on Jan 4, 2012 3:02 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
I just read on MLBtraderumors
that Chicago was asking 2 of the 3 for Garza. Heck, I’d give them both B boys for Garza. The Yankees keep Montero’s bat and get an established starter who has had success in the AL East. And you still have Phelps and Noesi. I’d pull the trigger on that.
Lol. Garza isn’t good enough to warrant that type of price tag. And since he’s a Super Two, he’s making more money than the average player with two years of team control left would normally make.
Dave Cameron just discussed his trade value, and it’s not worth Montero alone, so asking for Montero and Banuelos or Betances is nonsense.
Contributing writer for Pinstripe Alley.
Follow me on Twitter @frankiecamp48
by Frank Campagnola on Jan 3, 2012 8:40 PM EST reply actions
Would you do Banuelos+Betances for Garza as OldYankee Fan suggests?
Usqueadbaugham! Anam muck an dhoul ! Did ye drink me doornail?
You didn’t ask me, but I’ll give my 2 cents anyway. I wouldn’t do that. Betances+, I would most likely be fine with. Just no Manny or Jesus.
Jesus Montero fangirl
by WhatwouldJeterdo on Jan 3, 2012 8:45 PM EST up reply actions
I’d do Betances+ as well, but only if there weren’t any short term free agent options available.
Contributing writer for Pinstripe Alley.
Follow me on Twitter @frankiecamp48
by Frank Campagnola on Jan 3, 2012 8:46 PM EST up reply actions
Oh, definitely. I said yesterday that there is absolutely no need to give up anything for Garza, much less to be desperate about it, right now with such good options available for money only.
Jesus Montero fangirl
by WhatwouldJeterdo on Jan 3, 2012 8:47 PM EST up reply actions
This all seems sensible to me.
Banuelos’ stock seems to have fallen atter last season, and I was wondering how much.
Usqueadbaugham! Anam muck an dhoul ! Did ye drink me doornail?
by Q-TDSK on Jan 3, 2012 9:15 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
According to John Sickels, the prospect evaluator for SB Nation over at minorleagueball.com, his stock is the same. He didn’t change his grade from 2011 to 2012.
Contributing writer for Pinstripe Alley.
Follow me on Twitter @frankiecamp48
by Frank Campagnola on Jan 3, 2012 9:16 PM EST up reply actions
I did see Sickles' article
Honestly I thought the B was a drop from last year (of course I didn’t go looking for it.) But on top of that, there just seemed to me to be a slightly more worried tone in comments about him among people here.
Usqueadbaugham! Anam muck an dhoul ! Did ye drink me doornail?
He gained some velocity and just hasn’t really figured out how to adapt to it yet, in my opinion. I 100% believe that he will, though. If we’re still having this conversation after next year, I might start to get a little concerned, but he is so young that I’m not worried about it yet.
Jesus Montero fangirl
by WhatwouldJeterdo on Jan 3, 2012 9:21 PM EST up reply actions
He's definitely still young.
And I’m definitely more interested in keeping him around to see if he develops than flipping him for somebody more established, personally.
Usqueadbaugham! Anam muck an dhoul ! Did ye drink me doornail?
Come to think of it, I think I read a comment of yours saying something similar.
Contributing writer for Pinstripe Alley.
Follow me on Twitter @frankiecamp48
by Frank Campagnola on Jan 3, 2012 8:47 PM EST up reply actions
No. There are options left in free agency that could be had for basically what Garza would be making over the next two years – and Garza would mean trading away two promising starters.
With Oswalt and Kuroda, you have one year options that provide more upside than what the Yankees already have, and it wouldn’t cost them them any top 5 prospects.
Contributing writer for Pinstripe Alley.
Follow me on Twitter @frankiecamp48
by Frank Campagnola on Jan 3, 2012 8:46 PM EST up reply actions
I'd definitely take a one-year flier on Oswalt
Maybe two if there’s a discount involved (and no opt-out clause.)
Usqueadbaugham! Anam muck an dhoul ! Did ye drink me doornail?
Also, about time they started showing interest in Kuroda and Oswalt. Their apparent lack of interest in the two throughout the offseason made absolutely no sense to me.
Contributing writer for Pinstripe Alley.
Follow me on Twitter @frankiecamp48
by Frank Campagnola on Jan 3, 2012 8:44 PM EST reply actions
well, I suppose it's a good way to see what the market is like on them
if they Yankees were going hard after them from the get-go, then they would have all the negotiating power. As it is, if they want to play next year, it’s down to the few teams showing interest, and the Yankees have some leverage in negotiating.
Montero?
No. I’d do maybe Betances+Sanchez+ a couple mid level guys if that could somehow get done.
I'll do whatever it takes to win games, whether it's sitting on a bench waving a towel, handing a cup of water to a teammate, or hitting the game-winning shot.- Kobe Bryant
A.J. Burnett's only fan!
In an absolutely fair deal, it’d be only Sanchez
Contributing writer for Pinstripe Alley.
Follow me on Twitter @frankiecamp48
by Frank Campagnola on Jan 3, 2012 8:50 PM EST up reply actions
Or Sanchez and a back end rotation type of starter like Warren.
Contributing writer for Pinstripe Alley.
Follow me on Twitter @frankiecamp48
by Frank Campagnola on Jan 3, 2012 8:51 PM EST up reply actions
Yea, but since when are teams fair to the Yankees?
Garza’s a great pitcher who would be good for this team and with the need for pitchers I’d probably be willing to part with Betances as well if it meant bringing him here. I’d like to do Sanchez+Phelps/Warren like you suggested, but I can’t see the Cubs going for it. I’m not even sure they’d accept Sanchez+Betances, seeing as everyone knows the Yankees are looking for pitching and Garza just came off the best year of his career.
I'll do whatever it takes to win games, whether it's sitting on a bench waving a towel, handing a cup of water to a teammate, or hitting the game-winning shot.- Kobe Bryant
A.J. Burnett's only fan!
You can’t demand the world for Garza when the demand for Garza isn’t great. I could sign a guy like Hiroki Kuroda for 1 year around the same price as Garza’s average annual salary over the next two, and Kuroda doesn’t cost me two top 100 prospects.
Also, the other trades this winter that have demanded top prospects involved pitchers with 4+ years of team control switching uniforms, and they weren’t Super Twos. Garza is a Super Two with two years of team control left – meaning he’ll make much more $$ than the average player with two years of team control left would normally make
Contributing writer for Pinstripe Alley.
Follow me on Twitter @frankiecamp48
by Frank Campagnola on Jan 3, 2012 8:59 PM EST up reply actions
Marketability
Someone will pay for the marketability of his name. The ability to sell tickets counts for something.
While the type of people that post here would be more excited to see Banuelos on the mound, the guy who only goes to games when he can score company tickets would be much more excited to see Garza.
Company tickets guy > You
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 3, 2012 9:06 PM EST up reply actions
So you’re saying that the Yankees should offer their top prospects for a slightly above average pitcher so that Joe Somebody will take company tickets?
Contributing writer for Pinstripe Alley.
Follow me on Twitter @frankiecamp48
by Frank Campagnola on Jan 3, 2012 9:09 PM EST up reply actions
Revenue
Revenue > Everything else that you think is important in baseball.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 3, 2012 9:24 PM EST up reply actions
You know what’s important? Making smart baseball decisions, not asinine, short sighted decisions to appease Company Tickets Guy.
Contributing writer for Pinstripe Alley.
Follow me on Twitter @frankiecamp48
by Frank Campagnola on Jan 3, 2012 9:29 PM EST up reply actions
So using your logic, why didn’t the Yankees sign CJ Wilson? He’d be equally as marketable as Garza.
"Don't you think it's strange that you'll make more money than President Hoover this year?"
"Why not? I had a better year than he did." - G.H. Ruth
At least CJ Wilson is good
Contributing writer for Pinstripe Alley.
Follow me on Twitter @frankiecamp48
by Frank Campagnola on Jan 3, 2012 9:30 PM EST up reply actions
Lots of variables.
I’m not saying the Yankees will. Just saying someone will, and I used the Yankees as an example.
Company guy is all over the country.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 3, 2012 9:31 PM EST up reply actions
So your argument seems to be, “Baseball people sign people and make trades to sell tickets.”
"Don't you think it's strange that you'll make more money than President Hoover this year?"
"Why not? I had a better year than he did." - G.H. Ruth
Revenue
I’m saying EVERYTHING they do is to maximize profit. Sometimes, increased profit means overpaying (In dollars or prospects) to acquire an overrated veteran.
Matt Garza is a “brand”. With the help of the media, Garza has built a name for himself. (even though our name for him is “vastly overrated”)
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 3, 2012 9:38 PM EST up reply actions
To maximize profit, they make the team good enough to go to the World Series, where they earn tons more revenue from being one of the few teams playing all October. I think they care a great deal more by earning that huge October revenue than potentially hurting the team’s chances to get there by making a hypothetical Garza trade.
"Don't you think it's strange that you'll make more money than President Hoover this year?"
"Why not? I had a better year than he did." - G.H. Ruth
Marginal Dollars
The team with the greatest perceived marginal dollars to be gained from acquiring Garza will probably get him.
Marginal dollars comes in many forms. I don’t think October revenue is necessarily greater than regular season dollars.
163 games vs 19 games max? This is going to vary.
Additionally, I think its more accurate to put it this way:
“The HOPE of playoff games” vs “actual playoff games”
On a country wide basis, I’m fairly certain the former is FAR greater than the latter.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 3, 2012 9:49 PM EST up reply actions
He’ll just say you are too stupid and uneducated to get his point.
Jesus Montero fangirl
by WhatwouldJeterdo on Jan 3, 2012 11:45 PM EST up reply actions
Insecure?
This isn’t what I’d say at all. Perhaps your “tenure” has “earned” you the right to assume what we’d all say as well? Is this in the rules?
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 3, 2012 11:49 PM EST up reply actions
You did say it below, just in more flowery language.
Jesus Montero fangirl
by WhatwouldJeterdo on Jan 3, 2012 11:52 PM EST up reply actions
Where?
The only place I mention education is where I make the point that different educational backgrounds may contribute to the existence of different views.
An economist will probably have a different view of the world from an art major. Each could be educated.
This is simple enough that I think your assumption says more about you than anything I’ve said.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 3, 2012 11:58 PM EST up reply actions
That is what we did last year with Rafael Soriano.
We went out and got a ‘big name’ to try to spur interest after months of what was at the time a slow offseason. This winter we are paying the price of that decision as Soriano’s contract has hamstrung the Yankees’ ability to adequately fill what most feel is a lacking starting rotation. It’s just not a smart baseball decision to go out and sign someone or mortgage the future of the ballclub by trading away top prospects so that you can sell more tickets.
For every successful prospect, there are hundreds, if not thousands of failed prospects. This doesn’t mean that developing, investing in or keeping prospects is a failed philosophy.
Where’s the rotation without the strength of their revenue? How did Sabathia get to the Yankees? Texeira? Arod? Why does Beltran give the Yankees the option of matching before committing to the Cardinals?
As great as the Yankees have been, revenue has been their main competitive advantage since inception.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 4, 2012 12:58 AM EST up reply actions
Simple example:
Sabathia, Garza, Nova, Garcia, Burnett
vs
Sabathia, Nova, Garcia, Burnet, Noesi/Hughes/Warren/Phelps/etc.
The perceived difference between those 2 rotations is largely Garza’s “brand”. From the stats, to the radar gun readings, to his durability, all the way down to his mannerisms, spitting, flat baseball cap and big nose……all contribute to his brand.
You buy Matt Garza game in the same way that you buy a Matt Damon movie.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 4, 2012 1:39 AM EST up reply actions
If you say so
I don’t see it that way. Your casual, or even not so casual, baseball fan knows who CC is, or who Derek Jeter is, those are guys with a “brand”. Most people have no idea who Matt Garza is.
Romine!
I would argue that the Yankees brand >>>>>>>>>>>>>> any individual player
Matt Garza, Roy Oswalt, whomever. They’re all bigger brands with a Yankees hat on than without. So your argument that Garza is a brand is kind of superfluous. Sure he is, but so is everyone else, and if the rest are bigger, then the fans aren’t going to come to the stadium to see Matt Garza. They’re going to come see the Yankees.
The idiot formerly known as pkyankeefan! Now in Technicolour!
by Hasan Paliwala on Jan 4, 2012 1:47 AM EST up reply actions
Yankees Brand
Saying his brand isn’t worth it is an entirely different argument than saying it isn’t a factor. When you acknowledge it exists to varying degrees, I’m comfortable with my argument.
With this said, I think Garza’s reputation is much larger than you give him credit for. Even if you’ve never heard of him at all, it would take a casual fan 5 seconds to do a google search and see his above average credentials. It takes 1 article in the Post to figure out that he throws above average velocity or fits the description of “veteran power pitcher”. 1 huge game or shutout and everyone has heard his name. Another and he’s a household name.
He posted a low 3s ERA with nearly 200 Ks. I think you underestimate the casual fan and Garza’s accomplishments. Even people who barely watch the game are playing fantasy baseball now.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 4, 2012 2:19 AM EST up reply actions
Additionally....
I don’t think it’s safe to assume his brand wouldn’t have an effect with fans here. I’d venture to say at least 1/3 of Pinstripe Alley readers would be more excited to see Garza than Banuelos.
Let’s shift gears a bit:
If you could go back and sell Hughes or Chamberlain at their peaks, are you honestly telling me you wouldn’t make that move right now?
Do you really think keeping Hughes and Joba maximized revenue for the Yankees at this point?
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 4, 2012 2:25 AM EST up reply actions
That's ridiculous
One could use that argument with any prospect who didn’t live up to expectations.
As far as ManBan, I, for one, will be way more excited to see ManBan make his debut in Pinstripes than seeing Garza. Would I like to see Garza pitching for the Yankees? Sure. But not at the expense of Montero and Banuelos. Since there is no urgency in trading for Garza and since there are other viable options, why should we trade 2 guys who may turn out to be superstars? They may not, but I’d rather find out on our terms instead of seeing Banuelos winning 20 for the Cubs and Montero mashing 40 homers for them.
Romine!
This is why I discount the others when they cherry pick names like Soriano.
Let’s frame it another way. How many Yankee pitching prospects in the past 20 years have produced a better return than Garza for the Yankees, in the form of a trade or production?
I wouldn’t even put Ian Kennedy in this group because I don’t think his value would have appreciated this much in the AL East.
The Yankees do not have a good track record of developing pitchers. I actually like Banuelos as a prospect. In being realistic though, I weight all of the factors at hand, even those that lead me to alternative conclusions.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 4, 2012 2:59 AM EST up reply actions
In other words:
Assuming we want to check the track record:
When did “keep the Yankees pitching prospect” turn out to be right move?
Pettite – Came up 16 years ago.
Anyone else?
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 4, 2012 3:02 AM EST up reply actions
The Farm System
has sucked since then. We had terrible drafting and I think we still have average to below average development ability. Since Brian Cashman has taken more control of the team, the Yankee Farm System has slowly improved into the realm of respectability. Hughes/Chamberlain/Kennedy were the Yankees best pitching prospects in YEARS. Right now the strength of our farm is its depth at catcher and pitching, not overall, dominating talent, but enough guys who project to be very good to average and a lot of guys with high ceilings. Giving up Banuelos and Betances for Garza might be worth it in the short term, but if both pitchers can succeed that will give us two cost controlled young top of the rotation pitchers. The chance of both (or one) of Betances and Banuelos becoming valuable MLB talent is more valuable than Matt Garza will be.
Like Banuelos.
In exchange for Garza though, I’d have to mull that one over for a while.
Montero is untouchable for me.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 4, 2012 11:44 AM EST up reply actions
I don’t think the company tickets guy knows who Matt Garza is.
"Don't you think it's strange that you'll make more money than President Hoover this year?"
"Why not? I had a better year than he did." - G.H. Ruth
The Post
He would after the huge headline in the Post. Company guy likes headlines.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 3, 2012 9:23 PM EST up reply actions
There wouldn’t be a huge headline in the post for “TOP YANKEES PROSPECT MAKES DEBUT”?
"Don't you think it's strange that you'll make more money than President Hoover this year?"
"Why not? I had a better year than he did." - G.H. Ruth
The point.
The “acquired overrated veteran” headline sells more tickets. You and I would love to see Banuelos. Company guy wants a “blockbuster trade”.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 3, 2012 9:29 PM EST up reply actions
Sustained success sells the most tickets. Trading away top prospects for players like Matt Garza does not lead to sustained success.
Contributing writer for Pinstripe Alley.
Follow me on Twitter @frankiecamp48
by Frank Campagnola on Jan 3, 2012 9:31 PM EST up reply actions
Revenue
The argument could easily be made that revenue is a more effective resource in building a winning team than prospects.
Revenue is far more scalable and liquid.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 3, 2012 9:34 PM EST up reply actions
Okay, but making stupid baseball decisions isn’t going to lead to a lot of revenue. Making smart baseball decisions leads to sustained success, which leads to lots of revenue.
Contributing writer for Pinstripe Alley.
Follow me on Twitter @frankiecamp48
by Frank Campagnola on Jan 3, 2012 9:50 PM EST up reply actions
If the Yankees trade for Matt Garza and win ~70 games per season, there are gonna be a lot of empty seats at the stadium. Brand names aren’t going to change that because the majority of people do not care about the who, but about the success.
Jesus Montero fangirl
by WhatwouldJeterdo on Jan 3, 2012 9:54 PM EST up reply actions
Which is what I’m saying. Was this meant as a reply to me or Shea?
Contributing writer for Pinstripe Alley.
Follow me on Twitter @frankiecamp48
by Frank Campagnola on Jan 3, 2012 10:11 PM EST up reply actions
I was just elaborating on your point.
Jesus Montero fangirl
by WhatwouldJeterdo on Jan 3, 2012 10:12 PM EST up reply actions
Ah, got ya.
Contributing writer for Pinstripe Alley.
Follow me on Twitter @frankiecamp48
by Frank Campagnola on Jan 3, 2012 10:13 PM EST up reply actions
Banuelos vs Garza
I think we’re losing something here. While Garza is overrated, Banuelos is still extremely unlikely to ever be as good as Garza is now.
While it’s possible that Banuelos provides more cost efficient production vs Garza (production per $), it doesn’t mean he’d provide more wins.
Garza is overrated, but still a LOT better than Banuelos, and would arguably be the 2nd best pitcher on the Yankees right now. He’d be a heavy favorite to be a top 4 pitcher in the organization right now.
It’s extremely unlikely the Yankees are a better team for the next 2 years with Banuelos instead of Garza. Additionally, the Yankees also have the option of trading him away to recoup some of the cost in talent.
Yes he’s overrated. He is still an above average pitcher with upside to improve. He’s a FAR better bet than anyone in the Yankees minor league system.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 3, 2012 10:20 PM EST up reply actions
Banuelos has nothing to do with what I said.
Jesus Montero fangirl
by WhatwouldJeterdo on Jan 3, 2012 10:30 PM EST up reply actions
Banuelos is the high end of the perceived alternative to acquiring Garza.
Your argument against the move is the cost of 70 win seasons, implying that acquiring veterans leads to 70 win seasons.
I believe this is a vast oversimplification and I’m using the current circumstances to illustrate my point.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 3, 2012 10:33 PM EST up reply actions
No, that is not at all what was said or implied.
Jesus Montero fangirl
by WhatwouldJeterdo on Jan 3, 2012 10:34 PM EST up reply actions
"If the Yankees trade for Matt Garza and win ~70 games per season"
Actually it’s precisely what you said.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 3, 2012 10:35 PM EST up reply actions
It’s in no way saying that Matt Garza or any other veteran signing would be THE cause of that, so no, it isn’t.
Jesus Montero fangirl
by WhatwouldJeterdo on Jan 3, 2012 10:36 PM EST up reply actions
It's clearly implied.
If you didn’t mean to imply causation, then the post has very little relevance in this context.
I could just as easily say “If it rains on August 16, and the Yankees win 70 games….blah blah blah”.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 3, 2012 10:40 PM EST up reply actions
Um, no.
You have been saying that big names/big trades bring in lots of revenue. If a team isn’t winning, they aren’t going to put people in seats, regardless of what big signings or trades they make. Matt Garza will not put people in seats on a 70 win team. The majority of people don’t care enough for him to matter. Winning is more important to fans than big names.
Jesus Montero fangirl
by WhatwouldJeterdo on Jan 3, 2012 10:45 PM EST up reply actions
especially since Garza is no Felix
when we faced him in Seattle it was a little weird seeing all those fans that came just to see Felix and demand strikeouts like he was some kind of circus show. We’re far removed from the days of Walter Johnson. No one is coming to see just one man unless he is THE best on one of the worst teams.
Look at the seats in Toronto and Jose Bautista. He’s been one of the best players in the game the past couple years. Is he filling their stadium? Nope. Not even close. I’d bet a few seasons at the top of the AL East would change that, though.
Jesus Montero fangirl
by WhatwouldJeterdo on Jan 3, 2012 10:53 PM EST up reply actions
what a concept
Winning teams’ fans could really care less about one guy as long as they’re winning and losing teams’ fans won’t be filling up a stadium just for one guy. Seattle is still pretty empty even when Felix is pitching
Perception
- 1 situation does not make the rule. With this said, his wins are devalued due to their perceived point on the win curve.
- The stadium is a lot less empty when Felix pitches, which is value we’re trying to derive here. MARGINAL dollars. INCREMENTAL revenue.
- The value of all wins (perceived or real) increase as you move up the win curve.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 3, 2012 11:08 PM EST up reply actions
My point.
“You have been saying that big names/big trades bring in lots of revenue.”
This is not what I said at all. I said this dynamic exists in SOME cases. taking my point and putting it into your own imaginary context doesn’t make it false.
My point in comparing Garza to Banuelos in this context is to say that “not only are you taking my point out of context. your point doesnt even apply in THIS context”.
If your point is marginal wins have different value in different contexts, then I agree and you actually support my main point, which was to say that the team that maximizes Garza’s marginal value will acquire him, whether that marginal value is in the form of WINS or PERCEIVED WINS.
Perception is at least as important as reality. In the dominant “culture of stupid” that we live in, you could easily argue that it is more important.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 3, 2012 11:03 PM EST up reply actions
What is perceived wins?
any good GM is going to pick the better player over the bigger name. Sure, some GMs make deals to ‘make a splash’ but usually those players are talented and are needed. The Marlins may have went for big names, but they still got talented players that will help them win. A team filled with Jorge Posadas and Vladimir Guerreros is not going to fill a lot of seats.
Nostradamus
If you could accurately forecast the real win value of even 1/3 of the transactions in this game, you’d have to be a moron to spend your time doing anything besides betting baseball.
All outcomes are perceived until they happen.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 3, 2012 11:14 PM EST up reply actions
Semantics? Really?
You are devolving to semantics when there is a clear conflict in philosophy. Yea, that’s not a good sign for you.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 3, 2012 11:19 PM EST up reply actions
usually I refrain from arguing semantics
but in this discussion the use of perceived and the use of potential have completely different connotations. Your use of perceived led me to believe that the name brand signing would make people believe that the signing would bring more wins than they actually will.
Because you have proven so much of what you have said that we should all take it as fact. Nope.
Jesus Montero fangirl
by WhatwouldJeterdo on Jan 3, 2012 11:19 PM EST up reply actions
Hardheaded
I have a feeling anyone would have a hard time proving anything to you that you don’t already believe. Just a hunch.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 3, 2012 11:21 PM EST up reply actions
No, I just don’t accept a lot of one person’s conjecture without anything to back it up.
Jesus Montero fangirl
by WhatwouldJeterdo on Jan 3, 2012 11:23 PM EST up reply actions
I think
if you spent a little less time being condescending and a little more time actually proving your argument then i think we all could take your argument into consideration
Now there is a concept.
Jesus Montero fangirl
by WhatwouldJeterdo on Jan 3, 2012 11:24 PM EST up reply actions
I’m fine with what I’ve said here. I’m not interested in “proving my point” to those who don’t get it based on what I’ve posted already.
Lots of reasons for diagreement: cultural background, educational background, intellectual capacity, pride, etc.
I’ve made my point with my target audience. Based on your replies, I can tell you with great certainty that you are not my target audience.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 3, 2012 11:31 PM EST up reply actions
Show up 2 days ago, insult everyone. Love it. Classic.
Jesus Montero fangirl
by WhatwouldJeterdo on Jan 3, 2012 11:33 PM EST up reply actions
Sensitive?
- Didn’t realize how sensitive some of you were. Is it an insult to tell you that I think you are wrong or have a bad argument?
- Does greater tenure give you more right to take comments out of context, generalize oversimplified strategies to 30 unique circumstances or to underestimate variance in the game?
If I play your game, I could just as easily say “keeping overrated prospects and winning 70 games per year while your competition consistently sells high, makes more money and buys more talent leads to less ticket sales”.
This would be a vast oversimplification, and wouldn’t contribute anything to my point at all. I’m using a broader context as the basis of my argument, and you want me to drag me down to a granular level to disprove my point. This is not “insulting”. This is stupidity.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 3, 2012 11:44 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, EVERYONE who has contributed here disagrees, so we’re just dumb. It’s in no way you that has a bad argument. Funny.
And yeah, you don’t get to show up 48 hours ago and start insulting people for not bowing to your almighty unproven opinion.
Jesus Montero fangirl
by WhatwouldJeterdo on Jan 3, 2012 11:47 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, the “King’s Corner” was pretty neat. Not so neat when I was there two days later and it was empty with Vargas pitching.
by MichaelGGBGrabow on Jan 4, 2012 1:54 PM EST up reply actions
30 Unique Situations
Each team has unique circumstances. Yes, in some cases the better baseball decision is to keep the talent. One can just as easily argue a short term revenue boost can contribute to long term success.
Energize the base (as Obama would say) → increase ticket sales/boost perceived value of TV contract -→ more money —→ higher sustainable payroll.
Revenue is at least as important to long term success as prospects.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 3, 2012 9:55 PM EST up reply actions
They don’t even watch the game most of the time.
Jesus Montero fangirl
by WhatwouldJeterdo on Jan 3, 2012 9:25 PM EST up reply actions
Doesn’t matter if they watch. It only matters if they paid. You know when you see tickets at “insane prices”? That’s because company guy wants to make sure he doesn’t sit with dirty “normal people”.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 3, 2012 9:28 PM EST up reply actions
They go to drink, socialize, and have a chance at being an idiot on tv while they are on the phone with their girlfriend/mom/friend who didn’t get to go. They will pay for their tickets and overpriced beer whether it’s Matt Garza or someone else. They don’t care because they don’t watch the games. They want a good story to tell, one in which the team they went to see wins so they can say they were there. And if “company guy” A doesn’t want to go watch Manny Banuelos or whatever prospect pitch because he’d rather see Matt Garza, or other flashy name pitcher guy, “company guy” B will be happy to because he just wants to go to a game.
Jesus Montero fangirl
by WhatwouldJeterdo on Jan 3, 2012 9:37 PM EST up reply actions
Depends.
The Yankees are probably set in appeasing company guy, but company guy in Pittsburgh, Minnesota or Toronto could probably use a boost.
I just used the Yanks as an example. Someone will overpay in performance/talent for that boost.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 3, 2012 9:41 PM EST up reply actions
Fans are replaceable everywhere. If a company is doing a ticket thing and one guy doesn’t want to go because Prospect Z is pitching and he doesn’t know who that is, then there is someone else who does not care willing to take his place, especially if the company is picking up the tab. That is true in New York, Toronto, or BFE. For every fan everywhere who is unhappy enough with what trades/signings happened or did not happen to not want to attend games/buy merch/support a team, there are plenty more people there to jump on the bandwagon who don’t care.
Jesus Montero fangirl
by WhatwouldJeterdo on Jan 3, 2012 9:51 PM EST up reply actions
Anecdotes
Every situation is different. A hypothetical situation is not universally applicable.
Like I said, some teams have done enough to appease the casual fan. Other teams may feel the need to manipulate perception with a headline featuring a veteran acquisition.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 3, 2012 10:02 PM EST up reply actions
My argument doesn’t need to be universally applicable to be correct.
If my argument applies to 1 out of 30, I’d be right. For the argument against here, their scenario would have to exist in 30 out of 30 situations.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 3, 2012 10:56 PM EST up reply actions
Jumping in here, I don’t think that’s how it works.
by bloppy_ploppy on Jan 3, 2012 10:58 PM EST up reply actions
sure, I suppose 'some' and 'others'
allow you to be almost completely wrong and still be somewhat right.
If you need to become dumber to prove your point, perhaps it’s not worth it.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 3, 2012 11:10 PM EST up reply actions
When you need to continually overgeneralize, it’s a sign your argument is weak.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 3, 2012 11:11 PM EST up reply actions
Saying that “in some cases” without proof is better.
Jesus Montero fangirl
by WhatwouldJeterdo on Jan 3, 2012 11:20 PM EST up reply actions
Myth?
Is it really so hard to understand that maximizing revenue means mortgaging the future sometimes? Really?
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 3, 2012 11:24 PM EST up reply actions
You're completely wrong
And in the absence of any kind of argument, you resort to big words to try to appear as if you know what you’re talking about. What team’s fanbase will only go pay tickets to see a certain player. Is that percentage of the fanbase going to be larger than the one that would go see a winning team? Not a chance.
New York Knicks = Sleeping Giants
the company guy most likely wallows in his own dung
Last night, a comedian died in New York. Somebody knows why. Somebody knows
by Rorschach44 on Jan 4, 2012 9:10 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
And if you really want marketability, Roy Oswalt is a far more marketable name that could be had on a short term free agent contract, meaning no need to offer top prospects.
Contributing writer for Pinstripe Alley.
Follow me on Twitter @frankiecamp48
by Frank Campagnola on Jan 3, 2012 9:12 PM EST up reply actions
Also, Garza isn’t great. Fangraphs has him worth 12.6 WAR over the last four years (3.2 WAR per year), and Baseball Reference has him at 11.9 over the last four (~3 WAR per year).
His ERA+ is pretty average for his career at 109, and his career FIP is about 4.00. Garza is a fine starter, but he’s not good enough or under team control long enough to demand top prospects.
Contributing writer for Pinstripe Alley.
Follow me on Twitter @frankiecamp48
by Frank Campagnola on Jan 3, 2012 9:06 PM EST up reply actions
3.2 WAR
I hate WAR and I think it’s completely worthless for pitchers. With this said, 3.2 is above average for starting pitchers. Garza is overrated, but come on, he’s a very good pitcher.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 3, 2012 10:44 PM EST up reply actions
I actually think fWAR is better for pitchers than it is hitters.
If only because UZR can be rather fickle.
WAR = Lame
Besides the obvious weakness of defensive metrics, I think weighting on base events vs terrible pitchers and great pitchers is a vast oversimplification.
To use an extreme example, I don’t think the guy who can walk vs a terrible pitcher = a guy who can squeeze out an infield hit vs Halladay. In other words, I don’t think the ability to walk against Brian Matusz helps you at all when you’re facing Cliff Lee in the playoffs. Different skills sets that are weighted equally using WAR.
WAR assumes even distribution of production, which doesn’t make it useless, but makes it a horrible measure of the most effective players.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 4, 2012 1:04 AM EST up reply actions
All pitchers and hitters get to ‘pad their stats’ against inferior competition over the course of a season. That’s true for wRAA, batting average, FIP, ERA, and every other advanced and simple stat that we have so far.
Although I would be interested in a stat that you are alluding too; one that values extra base hits off of Roy Halladay more than ones off of Doug Davis. But until then, I feel that WAR is a relatively accurate measure of an individual’s contribution to their team.
"To get him for only $4 mil per season for the next two years ain’t bad."
If that “ain’t bad”, then what does double that price do for you?
Most arguments are really about context.
Oh crap, I don't know where I got $8 mil from.
Regardless, he’s still been worth over $8 mil per season in both years so it’s still a fine deal.
"Don't you think it's strange that you'll make more money than President Hoover this year?"
"Why not? I had a better year than he did." - G.H. Ruth
so...
if Crisp is worth $14M for 2, how much is GGBG worth?
The above comment is not affiliated with the San Francisco Giants, is not based on a secret source of team information, and may contain personal opinion.
"I'll never forget San Francisco and all those beautiful moments."- Andres Torres
That would be a good question.
If Gardner was a free agent right now, what contract would you sign him to?
"Don't you think it's strange that you'll make more money than President Hoover this year?"
"Why not? I had a better year than he did." - G.H. Ruth
maybe something a little less or equal than Grandy’s contract, which is 5 years for $30.25 million. They recently have similar WAR vaules, but Granderson has been better for longer, while Brett has been like this for only two full seasons. Granderson was already a very solid outfielder with the Tigers.
So while Curtis’ contract climbs quickly with each season ($3.5M, $5.5M, $8.25M, $10M, $13M option), I would give Gardner a similar contract, maybe only 4 years, for around 5 to 6 million a year
by bloppy_ploppy on Jan 3, 2012 10:43 PM EST up reply actions
well, the past three years, Coco Crisp has had a cumulative 5.9 WAR, around 3 WAR per season. If he does not regress at all (which is highly unlikely), then the A’s will be paying Coco about $2.33 million/WAR.
Brett Gardner, the past three years, has had a 11.1 WAR, 3.7 WAR/year. If we were to sign Brett to a two year contract and he neither regresses nor improves (both unlikely), then a Coco-esque contract would be about 2 years, $17.3 million.
The truth is, Gardner is not that great. He’s a good player, oh sure, but it’s his minimum salary contract that makes him so valuable. Granderson has averaged 4.52 WAR the past 5 seasons, but Gardner is a more valuable potential trading piece mainly because he produces WAR close to Granderson at 1/16 the cost.
by bloppy_ploppy on Jan 3, 2012 10:36 PM EST up reply actions
Oh wow, that’s bad math. 6/3=2.
so that would be $3.5 million/WAR for Coco
And then Brett would get a 2 year, $26 million deal
by bloppy_ploppy on Jan 3, 2012 10:38 PM EST up reply actions
How can you say that
Garza is overrated? With the exception of his first year in the majors where he had an ERA over 5, every season since, his ERA has been under 4. I would rather give up both B boys for him then try to sign Edwin Jackson.
And that would be nuts.
Jesus Montero fangirl
by WhatwouldJeterdo on Jan 3, 2012 10:46 PM EST up reply actions
An ERA in the high 3’s for 5 years means you’re a consistent, above average pitcher. People call Garza a high number two.
And ERA is not a tell all statistic.
And the Killer B’s for Garza? Wut?
by bloppy_ploppy on Jan 3, 2012 10:47 PM EST up reply actions
So you’re also getting rid of Hughes and AJ?
by MichaelGGBGrabow on Jan 4, 2012 2:38 PM EST up reply actions
In regards to pitchers
I’d take consistency over unproven pitching prospects that almost always never pan out anyway any day of the week.
I’d take the reply button anyday as well.
So, why would you go after Garza, which would cost you two top prospects, and not Edwin Jackson? Jackson has averaged a little more than 3WAR/year the past three years, while Garza has averaged a little lower, around 2.9 WAR/year. Even if the difference is marginal, you pay Garza his contract and have to part with two top prospects. Jackson is a free agent, so you just sign him with a contract
by bloppy_ploppy on Jan 3, 2012 10:53 PM EST up reply actions
A deciding factor for me
is that Garza pitched better with TB than Jackson did when he was with TB. Garza would hold up better against the AL East.
by OldYankee Fan on Jan 3, 2012 11:00 PM EST up reply actions
But that probably has more to do with Jackson just not being very good 4-5 years ago than it is Garza being able to handle AL East hitting.
by bloppy_ploppy on Jan 3, 2012 11:08 PM EST up reply actions
ah right, this is Edwin Jackson's WAR:
by bloppy_ploppy on Jan 3, 2012 11:28 PM EST up reply actions
I laughed
Follow me on twitter @nyybrandonc
Co-Manager/Writer for Pinstripe Alley, Editor/Writer for Blueshirt Banter
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
"Every day is a great day for hockey."
by Brandon C. on Jan 4, 2012 3:02 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
BAA/OPS/tOPS+
(tOPS+ indicates how well the batters did against the certain pitcher compared to usual, >100 means batters did better, <100 pitchers did better)
Against Baltimore:
Garza: .222/./691/94
Jackson: .222/.626/63
Against Boston:
Garza:.238/.716/102
Jackson: .307/.873/126
Against New York:
Garza: .270/.799/124
Jackson: .271/.802/107
Against Toronto:
Garza: .236/.615/75
Jackson: .242/.736/89
So it’s really a wash. Jackson killed the orioles more than Garza did. Garza got crushed by Boston less, while Jackson got crushed by New York less. And Garza beat up on the Blue Jays more than Jackson did.
by bloppy_ploppy on Jan 3, 2012 11:19 PM EST up reply actions
Jackson = Garza
Jackson and Garza are as close to identical talents as you will find in this sport. The difference right now contract.
So Killer B’s in exchange for the option to shift those resources to the new “flavor of the month” in 2 years. The correct answer to this is driven more by the rate of inflation/deflation than expectations of performance. It’s not as cut and dry as most people here will think. You could easily argue in favor of acquiring Garza vs signing Jackson. Weighing the new CBA, I’d probably lean towards signing Jackson.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Jan 3, 2012 10:52 PM EST reply actions
4
Follow me on twitter @nyybrandonc
Co-Manager/Writer for Pinstripe Alley, Editor/Writer for Blueshirt Banter
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
"Every day is a great day for hockey."
by Brandon C. on Jan 4, 2012 3:02 AM EST via mobile reply actions 2 recs
testicles?
so that’s 2 2’s?
Last night, a comedian died in New York. Somebody knows why. Somebody knows
I don’t even knOw
Follow me on twitter @nyybrandonc
Co-Manager/Writer for Pinstripe Alley, Editor/Writer for Blueshirt Banter
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
"Every day is a great day for hockey."
by Brandon C. on Jan 5, 2012 2:45 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
I believe 4 is considered an unlucky number in China
Racist.
"Don't you think it's strange that you'll make more money than President Hoover this year?"
"Why not? I had a better year than he did." - G.H. Ruth
Bottom Line
Sign Jackson or Oswalt and hold on to prospects would make most happy
Only trade the farm for a true ace like King Felix /linceum. Then the roation looks dramatically different.
Eith Felix or CC facing other teams number 2 is exciting
good for him
I guess. I can’t really feel feelings about it one way or another.
by long time listener on Jan 4, 2012 1:10 PM EST up reply actions
Can’t feel feelings? You should probably get that heckled out!
Follow me on twitter @nyybrandonc
Co-Manager/Writer for Pinstripe Alley, Editor/Writer for Blueshirt Banter
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
"Every day is a great day for hockey."
by Brandon C. on Jan 4, 2012 1:29 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
"heckled out"
I’ll go to a comedy club and see if that helps.
by long time listener on Jan 4, 2012 1:30 PM EST up reply actions
I hate the iPhone. (Not true, love it)
Follow me on twitter @nyybrandonc
Co-Manager/Writer for Pinstripe Alley, Editor/Writer for Blueshirt Banter
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
"Every day is a great day for hockey."
it's a love/hate relationship.
sixseasonsandamovie
♬P-p-pocket full of Hawthrones.♪
by noonoo on Jan 4, 2012 6:24 PM EST via iPhone app up reply actions
If the yankees even thought of giving edwin jackson 17 million id slaughter somebody
by capz1990 on Jan 4, 2012 12:58 PM EST via Android app reply actions
Just read this thread…oh dear.
Follow me on twitter @nyybrandonc
Co-Manager/Writer for Pinstripe Alley, Editor/Writer for Blueshirt Banter
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
"Every day is a great day for hockey."
I love how these threads always devolve into a flustercluck of shit.
sixseasonsandamovie
♬P-p-pocket full of Hawthrones.♪
by noonoo on Jan 4, 2012 6:24 PM EST via iPhone app up reply actions
THIS
was one of the worst threads i have EVER read on here… thanks to ALL of you for wasting my time as i try to avoid responsibility here in the office (by… um… trawling the Internet and wasting my time…)
seriously, i cannot get this ridiculous attitude by you, shea (and by “bettor” did you not mean “better”?): i think i’ve cultivated my ability to detect arrogance well enough in this life to whiff a stinkpot full of it in your tone. for what it’s worth, there’s nothing like some preachy, cynical talk about how sports is all about revenue to take all the fun out of being a fan. if that’s your point, take it to the wall street journal, and leave this space for folks who want to talk sports about a team they love. the rest of you, by the way, were not much better. couldn’t we just let uninvited stupidity die a quiet death? would have saved me the time it took to type this rant…
by sing_or_die_1818 on Jan 4, 2012 10:44 PM EST reply actions
haha i totally agree. if there is a comment/belief on this site that is not the norm or is kind of a different way of looking at things, you’re due for about 25 people to gang up on the person, most of whom are the common posters on this site, to disect every comment the person made and start insulting the person for the dumbest things…..such as capitalization….really guys?
it’s about time they look at a pitcher again…they won’t pull the trigger on Garza (get why if they want Montero, but there’s a lot of other pitchers and catchers for the Yankees), so build a package away from Montero. Really if Garza isn’t traded before the deadline, and Hughes isn’t showing great production, put hum up for Garza
by yankeesfan1325* on Jan 5, 2012 12:58 AM EST reply actions
Nakajima
Come on Nakajima, agree to a 1 year $1.5M deal with milestone incentives with the Yankees. You will get some decent playing time. The aging stars ARod and Jeter will need consistent rest time and it will provide you an opportunity to show case your skills on the field and batting. You can cash in next year when you hit the free agent market. Do it.
The Yankees can use an experience infielder with a decent bat and winning attitude. In addition, if one of the infielders hits the DL, you’ll have more playing time. Do it.
I like Chavez but his health has been an issue and I believe he only plays 3rd base.
Milestone?
Follow me on twitter @nyybrandonc
Co-Manager/Writer for Pinstripe Alley, Editor/Writer for Blueshirt Banter
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
"Every day is a great day for hockey."
by Brandon C. on Jan 5, 2012 2:48 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
1st career hit!
"Don't you think it's strange that you'll make more money than President Hoover this year?"
"Why not? I had a better year than he did." - G.H. Ruth
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Pinstripe Alley
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
