In support of Cashman
It seems my role here is becoming a supporter of the Status quo. That is not my desire. But I am tired of the stale old Cashman bashing. So, I looked it up.
Here is the history, as I see it. Cashman rose to GM of the Yanks in Feb 1998. He started with the Yanks as an intern. He does not seem to have any other baseball jobs. So, now he is over 9 years as GM of the team.
The only team members who he is not responsible for are Jeter, Mo and Posada.
I think his very best moves were trades; Soriano for Arod, Wells for Rocket. He also had very good free agent signings. Matsui, Pettitte, Giambi, Damon, Rocket.
He kept Wang and Cano in the system with Hughes, Rasner, DeSalvo, etc.
I like his recent change toward filling the minors with players with talent and potential.
I do not second guess the Johnson or Sheffield trades. I was glad to see those guys go. They were talented players but not good team mates. That he couldn't get more for them is partly because they were not sought after and were highly paid.
He also had some low points. Free agent signings of Contreras, Brown, Igawa have not worked. Only Igawa of this group is under contract with a chance to turn into anything.
Still that this is a very good team is due to his efforts.
If we dumped him, I do not think his replacement would be likely to be better. I do not think his replacement would be likely to be as good.
0 recs |
108 comments
Comments
Problem is that at the moment
I am not a Casman basher per se, but puh-lease. Pettitte and Clemens were no-brainers and I really don't think the Giambi deal has even remotely covered the amount of cash thrown at him. Matsui is decent but his number is not going to be retired any time soon and if Damon continues to break down like this over the next three years, that deal will be a bust. And don't just throw out Kevin Brown's name in passing without mentioning that Cash signed the single most obnoxious, disagreeable, piece-of-shit, asshole in baseball, who sucked so bad that I would almost hate the Yankees while that turd was pitching.
I don't sit around cursing him every minute like some people around here but, if you don't mind, I'll refrain from joining in the golden shower.
by garp on May 17, 2007 1:45 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Good baseball players are hard to get.
Look at the Chicago teams. That's a big market. Why aren't the Dodgers and Angels constant winners?
I hear noise, not thoughtful arguements that evaluate his work and compare it to his peers.
I do not care about "value" for the money. I care about wins.
And I'll stand judgement on how good the team is at the end of the season.
I think a real discussion of general managers would be interesting. I'd learn something from it.
by Cbeck3 on May 17, 2007 12:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I second ...
by DailyKingfish on May 17, 2007 12:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Been there, done that
by pfistyunc on May 17, 2007 12:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here
I did that a few months ago. A few things have changed since then (mainly in the upper section).
Yanks and prospects
by PinstripePowerhouse on May 17, 2007 12:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for the link, PPowerhouse ....
by DailyKingfish on May 17, 2007 1:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Like what?
Can he teach me the definition of a rookie or other things that passed you by a while ago?
by pfistyunc on May 17, 2007 1:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Like putting a link
But I must assume you are an asshole, and stupid to boot, as you STILL don't get that retard does not equal stupid.
If karma ever decides to bite you in the ass with a relative afflicted with Downs, (hopefully) you'll learn that.
by DailyKingfish on May 17, 2007 1:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Doesn't conversing with you
It was nice to search back and find the old thread. I will send Powershouse some brownies to thank him.
by pfistyunc on May 17, 2007 1:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks
Yanks and prospects
by PinstripePowerhouse on May 17, 2007 1:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, man
So yeah, that made the day much more bearable.
Yanks and prospects
by PinstripePowerhouse on May 17, 2007 1:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
May 27th
Yanks and prospects
by PinstripePowerhouse on May 17, 2007 1:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'll get with you about that
Yanks and prospects
by PinstripePowerhouse on May 17, 2007 1:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Eh
Yanks and prospects
by PinstripePowerhouse on May 17, 2007 1:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'll be there
by ReLaunch on May 17, 2007 2:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
cool, is greenfuz
by ReLaunch on May 17, 2007 2:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Your b'day is 5/27?
by Ronster22 on May 18, 2007 3:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Damn. My bad
by Ronster22 on May 18, 2007 3:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
NIce job of revisionist history, mg ...
He's made at least 5 mentions of me being "retarded", dumb, stupid.
And I have admitted to my mistakes. Perhaps if you re-read the transcript, you'd see that.
by DailyKingfish on May 17, 2007 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm with mg and pfisty
Stupid might be abit harsh, though.
How about dumbass?
by Ronster22 on May 18, 2007 3:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
OK I read the list
Still I'd say that your list makes my point. If you have one of the top 6, or even top 10 guys in the game, chances are a change will move you down the list. PARTICULARLY if you pick a candidate without experience at this level.
So, here is a list of what I suggest are metrics for a GM.
The more wins per season, the better the GM. (Particularly over a period of several years.)
I am very cautious about P&L statements. But, the team should not operate at a large loss. So, the closer to break even the better the GM. I'd be happy to discuss P&L at further length if anyone (besides Pf) is interested.
Since the GM is responsible for creating an attractive product, attendance should trend up. So the larger the attendance the better the GM. This metric probably needs some correction for market size, ballpark size, etc, but for ease we might also look at away attendance, which is a pretty unbiased measure of team attractiveness.
The GM should not drive away players fans, or potential trading partners. But we do not need to measure that because failures here will show up in performance attendance or financial performance.
Any other suggestions for objective measures of a GM's worth?
by Cbeck3 on May 17, 2007 8:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Cbeck, I'm with you on this
Unless there's a candidate out there that is flat out better than Cash I think we got stick with the devil we know.
All of these better GM's have also made their share of mistakes, and Kenny, Theo, Stoneman, Dombromski, etc. have all missed the playoffs at least once in the last few seasons.
Eventually I'd like to see if Damon O. is up for being the GM. (Maybe not next season but soon.)
by collink on May 17, 2007 8:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Before
by ReLaunch on May 17, 2007 8:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Absolutely
Yanks and prospects
by PinstripePowerhouse on May 17, 2007 9:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That is an interesting theory
by pfistyunc on May 17, 2007 9:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I understand your point, which is why I suggest
So road attendance percentage might be a good metric too. I see these numbers are available on http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/attendance?sort=home_avg&year=2001&seasonType=2
by Cbeck3 on May 18, 2007 10:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That is a better approach
by pfistyunc on May 18, 2007 10:43 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Cubs do draw well, home and away.
I don't know much about the NL. But is there something interesting about the Cubs? To me they look like the 4th best draw, behing Yanks RS and Cards. Cincinnati darws!?
by Cbeck3 on May 18, 2007 11:00 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Cubs play on a superstation
by pfistyunc on May 18, 2007 11:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But the Braves don't draw
Yanks and prospects
by PinstripePowerhouse on May 18, 2007 11:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And Cinci does! Grif Jr?
by Cbeck3 on May 18, 2007 11:29 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's the only reason I can think of
Yanks and prospects
by PinstripePowerhouse on May 18, 2007 11:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
They draw
by pfistyunc on May 18, 2007 11:32 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think so.
It is bad PR for a club to show too much profit, although the Yankees are to smart to do that.
I do not agree that "spending George's money" is bad.
George bought the Yanks "cheap" because they weren't winning. Spending to make them win has greatly increased the teams's value and greatly increased the teams income. Brilliant. He has secured his family's future.
This was George, not Cash's strategy, but Cash is implementing it properly.
Saying he spends too much is bull, total bull.
by Cbeck3 on May 18, 2007 10:52 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Yanks broke the all-time AL record
By your definition, Cashman has already done that.
by anaconda on May 18, 2007 11:32 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You seem to go out of your way....
Your "dollars spent per win" formula doesn't make a lot of sense in regards to the Yanks because they will ALWAYS have the most money and likely always spend the most money.
It wouldn't matter if Billy Beane or Oppenheimer is their next GM, he will have the same financial edge as Cashman or anyone else Steinbrenner decides to put in that role.
It's hard to argue that Cashman and Torre aren't doing their jobs when they have won more games, more hardware, and drawn more fans at home and on the road than any team in MLB over the past decade.
It's not even close.
Your formula may work with the smaller market teams, but it won't work for the Yanks because they will always spend a ton of money to spend no matter who runs the team.
by anaconda on May 18, 2007 11:50 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ruined it?
by Cbeck3 on May 18, 2007 12:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's a pretty good formula....
By your definition, WS championships are the only measure of success for this team.
That's fine, but it's impossible to win championships every season and I would argue that championships alone are not the only way to determine the success of an organization.
Ruth, Gehrig, DiMaggio, Mantle, Munson, or Reggie didn't win championships every season so I don't see how you could expect the current Yankees to do so.
There are 30 teams in MLB and it can't always go the Yankees' way.
by anaconda on May 18, 2007 12:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, but
I mean, the guy had two freakin' years to come up with a replacement for Bernie (he was clearly declining in 2003), and he gave us Damon. While I like the guy, we're going to have the exact same problem next year.
Yanks and prospects
by PinstripePowerhouse on May 18, 2007 12:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Age is a problem
The rules do not let us keep big league quality players in the minors for long.
Good young guys do not become free agents for quite a while. Their teams try to lock them up while they are the only bidder.
Good players only are available for trade when they approach the end of a contract.
I think the day is coming when it will be more common to eat the end of the long contracts if the player breaks down physically.
Still the asset that makes the Yanks is having the money to spend. There is pressure to find some where to spend it.
by Cbeck3 on May 18, 2007 12:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
BTW....Cbeck3
It provoked a lot of dialog and that's exactly what we all want.
Thanks.
by anaconda on May 18, 2007 12:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think regular season is the test.
The playoffs are a crapshoot.
by Cbeck3 on May 18, 2007 12:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is the last time I'll asnwer this again.
by Cbeck3 on May 18, 2007 12:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The biggest problem
It wouldn't matter if the Yanks topped 100 wins every season -- that formula will always illustrate that they spend the most money for each win.
by anaconda on May 18, 2007 12:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Attendance doesn't matter ...
We need a visionary like Gene Michael--someone who has an astute eye for talent. Cashman is respected, and decisive, but as in the Igawa deal, he's lacking that eye for talent. Ultimately that falls on him. That's what we need to keep the legacy train rolling. I don't think he has that ability.
by Ronster22 on May 18, 2007 3:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think thats right
When my father went to get best available for sunday tickets this year we got the top of the 3rd tier. When they show old games, I think I was watching mattingly's 2,000 hit the other day, the stadium looked so empty.
Am I wrong? My father tells me that I was at Yankee stadium in the snow watching andy pettitte pitch in 96, and I saw that game on tv and they said it was the home opener. Maybe I am wrong, I am only 20. When I grew up I didn't even pay attention to the world series in 96 and 98 99... I thought the Yankees won every year and it didn't seem so special. The subway series was the first one I actually watched.
by Edwantsacracker on May 18, 2007 6:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You are
Not sure when exactly was the duration of Stick's GM tenure, but I'm sure he has made some blunders also.
by ReLaunch on May 18, 2007 6:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I third that
That's 3 against 1 if you're keeping score at home Ronster.
by matthaggs on May 18, 2007 7:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed....
by anaconda on May 18, 2007 7:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was simply pointing out that none of these
by garp on May 17, 2007 1:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is so off base
by pfistyunc on May 17, 2007 6:54 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
My turn
That's great to hear. The problem though, isn't his stellar reputation, but his ability to put together a quality team--either by trades, free agent signings or from the farm. I point to two occasions this winter that would question that ability.
1. Penciling in Carol Pavano as a starter and
actually thinking he was going to produce.
I don't know of one person familiar with
the Yankees that expected anything from
that piece of shit.
2. Signing Igawa. Worse yet, he publicly
announced that he wasn't familiar with him
other than to say he wasn't a "Blower".
The Igawa move appears to me to have been a knee jerk reaction to the Sox signing Dice-K. I'm not saying we should have gone after Dice, I don't think I would have, but in your argument you stated it's not about money with you, it's about wins. In that case, I'm assuming you would have targeted Dice-K--in which case we likely wouldn't be in the predicament we are in this season.
I've lost faith in Cashman. He doesn't have an astute eye for talent--or even how to get it. It appears to me that he's stacking bodies (and from what we've seen some are damaged). At this point, I'd prefer to have an architect with a keen eye for young talent. That's what I'd go after. I think Pfisty mentioned someone who is already in the Yankees' fold. I just can't recall his name. He might be a great choice.
by Ronster22 on May 17, 2007 1:06 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Damon Oppenheimer
As for Cashman, don't forget to pencil in some of his other gems like.....Farnsworthless, Wright, Jeff Weaver, Kevin Brown, Cairomack, the folding chair with a pillow he uses as his backup catcher, Minky..the list is loooong.
by pfistyunc on May 17, 2007 1:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oppenheimer
Yanks and prospects
by PinstripePowerhouse on May 17, 2007 1:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
How long would it take him
by pfistyunc on May 17, 2007 1:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good Choice
by collink on May 17, 2007 1:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No changes until after the season
by Ronster22 on May 17, 2007 3:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's the Pitchers stupid
I like Cash, but it's hard not to see a problem with a lot of pitchers he brings in.
Cash has brought in a lot of pitchers that just couldn't cut it in NY or that had horrendous health issues.
Cash was right that Contreras would be a good to great MLB pitcher, but something didn't click with the Bronze Titan in NY.
There had to be some indication that Pavano doesn't like playing baseball before Cash signed him.
Brown and Johnson had health issues and big issues dealing with the media and teammates.
Though I still give Cash credit for that Aaron Small miracle.
Another good point with Cash is he puts up with all the extra political bullshit involved with the Yankees. Most GM's couldn't handle that, look at Theo he had melt down in Boston from the pressure to the point that he was leaving the office disguised in a halloween costume.
by collink on May 17, 2007 1:31 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Change after the season
by Ronster22 on May 17, 2007 1:40 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I'll read the past discussions
For me that is good performance. Additionally there are a number of good young players on the team. (Cano, Wang, Hughes, Melky, DeSalvo, Karstens, Rasner) and a number of more in the wings (Scranton, Newark, Tampa, etc.)
So, the record of unbroken success has a good chance of continuing.
It is true that past performance is an imperfect predicter of future performance. I however am not in a great hurry to dump this record.
by Cbeck3 on May 17, 2007 3:17 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The farm system/drafting
by pfistyunc on May 17, 2007 3:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It can't be a Cashman discussion
This year has been a bad one for Cash, no question about it. But last season didn't the Yanks have the best record in baseball?
The playoffs are a total crapshoot, especially the five games series in the first round. (If Game 2 vs. Detroit isn't rained out, the Yanks win the game and the series in my opinion.) Getting there is the trick, and it's one Cashman always accomplishes.
Cash has made some bad moves this season, but he's also had some pretty rotten luck with the injuries that put the team in a hole.
Towards the end of spring training, the rotation was:
1.Wang
2.Pettitte
3.Moose
4.Pavano
5.Igawa
5a. Karstens
Not great but not terrible.
And had he kept Randy Johnson, you could put a "hurt" label on him too.
By way of comparison, the Sox had:
1.Schilling
2.Beckett
3.Dice K.
4.Wakefield
5.Tavarez
Now about a week into the season, the Yanks rotation became
- Hurt
- Pettitte
- Hurt
- Hurt
- Igawa
Would the Red Sox have the record they have if they went a few weeks with:
- Hurt
- Beckett
- Hurt
- Hurt
- Tavarez
Cash made a bad roll of the dice with Pavano. He thought the big three and a decent Carl could get him to Clemens in good shape (I think he knew all along he had the inside track with the Rocket). And he thought the offense would win a few games by bludgeoning a few teams to death. Guys who have made a living producing runs are healthy but not hitting - that is NOT Cashman's fault. The pitching these past few weeks has been at least solid and in most cases better than solid. The hitters will hit eventually and the team will put together a run. Remains to be seen if they can catch the Sox or someone in the Central for the Wild Card. I think one or the other will definitely happen, and I think Cash has a few mid-season moves to make that will help get them there.
Yeah, Igawa was a bad move, but it was only money, and in Yankee-land it wasn't a lot of money (evidenced by the fact they dumped him to Tampa already).
GM of the Yankees is different than being GM of any other team. Cashman has proven he can handle it. I agree with the earlier post - stick with the devil you know.
by matthaggs on May 17, 2007 9:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with most of this, but
Everyone has some injuries, but this is an unusual streach.
I think that the Pavano, Igawa in the rotation were always placeholders for Rocket, Hughes.
And Igawa may still turn into a big leaguer.
On paper our Bullpen figured to be better than it has been. As they get to better workloads and enough rest will they return to form, regain lost confidence and be good? Cash and I hope so.
Have they shown more faith in Viz, Farnsworth, than they should have? If the starters were right, and or Mo was up to his own standard things would be much better.
But Myers, Henn, Proctor have been OK. We might even have reinforced the BP if we didn't need ALL the young arms as starters.
by Cbeck3 on May 18, 2007 10:41 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Let's not forget Blower-san
by pfistyunc on May 18, 2007 11:38 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The measure will be where they finish
But the Yanks have to play up to potential at some point.
by Cbeck3 on May 18, 2007 11:43 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Keen eye
by Ronster22 on May 17, 2007 3:24 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I think the correct metric is
I do not want 80 wins for half the player budget, which would look better on your suggestion.
No, I think this idea is wrong. Respectable with a smaller budget is still losing.
by Cbeck3 on May 18, 2007 11:38 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Still better than freakin' road attendance
by pfistyunc on May 18, 2007 11:42 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don't be silly
That's not a personnel position, It's top management. His job is P&L.
We want to win because it's fun. They want to win because it pays.
An attractive product (team) matters.
by Cbeck3 on May 18, 2007 11:47 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Again
by pfistyunc on May 18, 2007 12:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
'07 Aside
Correct answer is no one.
If wins are what matter, then the right guy has the job.
by matthaggs on May 18, 2007 1:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right
Odds are pretty good that the next guy will do less winning as oppossed to more winning.
It's been said several times but bears repeating: The playoffs are a total crapshoot, especially the short series - which is where the better team has a better chance of getting knocked off, and which is where the Yanks have had the most trouble.
Cashman's job is to get the team to the tournament.
by matthaggs on May 18, 2007 1:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gotta give the new guy a few years
by pfistyunc on May 18, 2007 1:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
So when the new guy loses more games
That's fuckin priceless.
by matthaggs on May 18, 2007 1:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
In the short term yes
by pfistyunc on May 18, 2007 1:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Trust me, I understand the slippery slope
by pfistyunc on May 18, 2007 1:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Seriously
Blower-san's playing ability is worth criticizing, but his contract is a non-issue. He can stay in Tampa the next 5 years and it won't stop Cash or the new guy from doing anything. I'm now begging you to stop bringing it up, mr. broken record.
Giambi will continue to put up numbers, so I'm not sure why having him around would be a problem either.
by matthaggs on May 18, 2007 1:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Luxury tax much?
As for Blower-san, he is still under contract for four more seasons. He is taking up a roster spot and is clearly not major league talent. Doesn't the fact that Cashman thought it was a good idea to spend over 9M/year for 5 years on this piece raise a red flag as to his decisionmaking ability? How about signing Carol Pavano and continuing to rely on him?
It is also worth noting that you have failed to address our point that the new guy needs some buffer time.
by pfistyunc on May 18, 2007 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Buffer time?
I think not.
This is the Yankees, not the Knicks we're talking about. And the calendar still says May.
As for Igawa, Cashman has admitted to not seeing him perform. Chances are, he counted on the advice of people you are so ready to give away his job to.
I agree that Cashman has made some lousy moves, but none of them have set the team back to the degree you are talking about. When it comes to the business of running the Yankees, he is the right man for the job.
For argument's sake, if Cash gets fired, and Stein needs to replace him, who does he go to for advice? And as a follow-up, do you REALLY trust those people to make the right decision? I sure don't.
by matthaggs on May 18, 2007 2:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sweet Christ you can be dense at times
by pfistyunc on May 18, 2007 2:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here's what I'm responding to
Cashman has fucked the immediate future so it is pretty natural that the new guy will see a regression for a few years since he will be picking up the pieces."
It's your post, and it suggests that the team will be bad for the next few years. I suggest otherwise, and would argue that the only way the team might go bad is if the team's two great stabilizers (Torre and Cashman) are sent packing.
And you still haven't answered who is going to sit around Stein's table and discuss Casman's replacement with him?
by matthaggs on May 18, 2007 2:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
"Bad" is a relative term
With Swindal gone, I don't know who will advise Steinbrenner, but one would have to assume that with Oppenheimer's current prestige among his peers and his close ties to Tampa, you have to like his chances.
by pfistyunc on May 18, 2007 2:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Instead of
Again: be careful what you wish for. And also consider that the man / men doing the hiring of the new guy might not be the best "baseball men" to make such an important decision.
by matthaggs on May 18, 2007 1:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You can't have it both ways....
In fact, the Marlins won their 1997 WS because they spent a lot of money on free agents.
Overall, they've managed just 4 seasons above .500 since 1995 (and in their existence) while the Yanks hadn't missed the playoffs at all during that same span.
As far as Oakland is concerned, they don't exactly have a ton of recent postseason success oozing out of their ears because they haven't won a championship since 1990 and Billy Beane hadn't won a single postseason series until last season against MIN -- despite consistently having one of the top rotations in MLB.
Everyone likes to say that pitching wins championships, but Oakland has had great pitching for awhile now and won just one postseason series since Beane took over.
Simply put, you are setting the bar so high that no amount of Yankee success is going to satisfy you unless it is a WS championship.
Baseball isn't that easy because there are 29 other teams competing for the same goal.
by anaconda on May 18, 2007 2:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hindsight is 20/20
Giambi was clearly one of the top hitters in the league at that time because he was coming off an MVP-season in 2000 and would have won it again in 2001 if not for Ichiro's ridiculous season.
They needed a big bat on the worst way and Giambi was the logical choice at the time because they needed a First-Baseman.
I heard nobody complaining about Damon signing last year because he had an outstanding season. They are complaining about Damon this season because he is struggling and hasn't been healthy.
Abreu hit .370 for this team in August and September and so many people loved him because he was an on-base machine with a .450+ OBP.
He was never the long-term solution for RF anyways and it was unlikely he would be retained following the 2007 season no matter what.
People now hate Abreu because he's struggling and playing terrible defense.
Yankee fans are like that. These guys will be tolerated (and in some cases, loved) again as soon as they start raking as we all know they are capable of doing.
It's always about, "What Have You Done For Me, Lately?"
by anaconda on May 18, 2007 2:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Cashman would agree with you
That is why he has adapted a new strategy of bringing the younger arms into the organization and developing them.
That is why he traded away Unit and Sheffield as well as Wright -- to bring in young arms.
Congratulations! You just endorsed Cashman's strategy!
As far as Giambi is concerned, the Yanks weren't going to get him if they didn't pony up the last 2 years.
Imagine the firestorm that would have followed if Cashman decided against bringing in one of the best bats in MLB because he didn't want those added two years and Giambi signed with an arch-rival?
It's always easier to criticize moves now long after the fact.
I wished Cashman had a crystal ball in front of him to influence decisions, but he doesn't and neither does anyone else.
by anaconda on May 18, 2007 3:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Farm
Jose Tabata looks good, but he's no guarantee. And they have Frankie Cervelli breaking out in Tampa. Other than that, we're looking pretty barren.
Yanks and prospects
by PinstripePowerhouse on May 18, 2007 3:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Giambi??
by pfistyunc on May 18, 2007 3:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
37 dingers and 113 RBI's
Is he worth $24 million? No. But he is still a very productive player.
by matthaggs on May 18, 2007 3:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think we're missing an enormous point here
He traded for Clemens, but you or I could have done that.
Traded for Justice, which was a good move at the time.
At that point, the team was slipping. So what does he do? Throws money at Mike Mussina. The next year, he writes a huge check to Giambi, and throws money at Steve Karsay. Oh, and brings in Rondell White to play left.
2003, he trades for Raul Mondesi and Jeff Weaver.
2004, he gets A-Rod because the Yanks are the only team with the checkbook to do so. Loses the battle of Vlad vs. Sheff (that deal was so close, and it's so painful today). Trades for the pedestrian Javy Vazquez and the uber-frustrating Kevin Brown. Throws a bag of money at Tom Gordon and Paul Quantrill.
2005, trades for Randy because that's one of maybe two places he'll go (and gives up who would be our current backup catcher in the process), signs Carl Pavano and Jaret Wright. I suppose you can give him credit for Small and Chacon, but they were flukes, so it was more good timing than finding good players.
I've obviously grazed over some things. But look at that, and tell me what Brian Cashman has DONE to deserve a vote of confidence.
Yanks and prospects
by PinstripePowerhouse on May 18, 2007 11:45 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Keep them winning
by Cbeck3 on May 18, 2007 11:50 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But the point is
Yanks and prospects
by PinstripePowerhouse on May 18, 2007 11:53 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's always been George's solution
Winfield
Catfish
Whio was that cionci lefty they paid so much for who was a bust, Holtzman?
Duque
Knoblock (SP?)
Nettles
Boggs
Shortstops by the score, Smalley, Bucky Dent etc etc.
It's show business baby. Get established stars, make the team win.
The stakes are up. The resurgent Yanks have revived baseball. Others are spending to catch up. It is harder.
THEY HAVE TO SPEND MORE NOW.
THEY HAVE TO TAKE MORE CHANCES.
BOSTON ARE NOT LOSERS ANYMORE.
by Cbeck3 on May 18, 2007 12:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
They traded for Knoblauch
The point is, anyone can throw money at a problem. It takes the creativity of Gene Michael to make the other parts work. When has Cashman EVER pulled a deal the caliber of Kelly for O'Neill?
Yanks and prospects
by PinstripePowerhouse on May 18, 2007 12:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The game is still played on the field.
Whatever Cashman's faults are, for the most part, the team that's on the field every day has the best chance of winning every day. The Yankee line up is just not performing...the potential of this team (under whatever guidance or influence from Cashman) is just being squandered right now.
by danbrady143 on May 18, 2007 1:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The only thing right is
But Cash has won enough to deserve the chance to lose. He should not get fired cause they look like they will lose.
It is May 18. Let's talk in October.
by Cbeck3 on May 18, 2007 11:53 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think anyone is saying
Yanks and prospects
by PinstripePowerhouse on May 18, 2007 11:55 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wins per Dollar----LOL
Now, everyone who thinks this is the way to measure a GM should go root for the Marlins, and blog on their site, if they have enough fans to have one.
Team 2006 payroll 2006 win win/million$
Florida Marlins $ 14,998,500.00 78 5.20
Colorado Rockies $ 41,233,000.00 76 1.84
Tampa Bay Devil Rays $ 35,417,967.00 61 1.72
Minnesota Twins $ 63,396,006.00 96 1.51
Oakland Athletics $ 62,243,079.00 93 1.49
Pittsburgh Pirates $ 46,717,750.00 67 1.43
Cleveland Indians $ 56,031,500.00 78 1.39
Cincinnati Reds $ 60,909,519.00 80 1.31
Kansas City Royals $ 47,294,000.00 62 1.31
Milwaukee Brewers $ 57,568,333.00 75 1.30
Arizona Diamondbacks $ 59,684,226.00 76 1.27
San Diego Padres $ 69,896,141.00 88 1.26
Toronto Blue Jays $ 71,915,000.00 87 1.21
Texas Rangers $ 68,228,662.00 80 1.17
Detroit Tigers $ 82,612,866.00 95 1.15
Washington Nationals $ 63,143,000.00 71 1.12
Baltimore Orioles $ 72,585,582.00 70 0.96
Philadelphia Phillies $ 88,273,333.00 85 0.96
New York Mets $101,084,963.00 97 0.96
St. Louis Cardinals $ 88,891,371.00 83 0.93
Los Angeles Dodgers $ 98,447,187.00 88 0.89
Seattle Mariners $ 87,959,833.00 78 0.89
Houston Astros $ 92,551,503.00 82 0.89
Atlanta Braves $ 90,156,876.00 79 0.88
Chicago White Sox $102,750,667.00 90 0.88
Los Angeles Angels $103,472,000.00 89 0.86
San Francisco Giants $ 90,056,419.00 76 0.84
Boston Red Sox $120,099,824.00 86 0.72
Chicago Cubs $ 94,424,499.00 66 0.70
New York Yankees $194,663,079.00 97 0.50
Sorry about the columns, but let's not hear any more of this "idea".
by Cbeck3 on May 18, 2007 4:00 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
It's no worse than judging a GM by attendance
Yanks and prospects
by PinstripePowerhouse on May 18, 2007 4:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would rather use total team income but
Do you have a way to measure it better?
I understand that the Yanks have an advantage now. But when you watch the Yankeeographies be sure to notice the empty stands from the not too distant past.
Creating an interesting team matters.
Filling the seats matters. Getting eyeballs on ads matters.
The Igawa detractors have to think about Yen. Matsui has brought the team a LOT of money. Boston and Seatle are in on the deal. WE WANT MORE. Igawa WILL be back.
If Igawa doesn't make it. We WILL try the same thing again.
I bet Yankee total income has gone up a larger percentage than attendance during Cashman's tenure.
George Steinbrenner likes success. He does not like wasting money. Remember how he was with Irabu, who was not very good, or with Dave Winfield, who George didn't think was worth the money?
Why do you think Cashman has been there so long? Why do you think he has the influence to protect Joe?
$$
by Cbeck3 on May 18, 2007 5:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you build it, they will come
However, the contention of the detractors is that Cashman hasn't displayed the ability to built a team. He inherited the winningest team of all time, so he had the advantage of a head start. However, when a player went, money was thrown at the problem. That can create short term success, but the long term effects can hurt the team.
Take 2001-2002 for example. After 2001, O'Neill and Brosius retired, Chuck Knoblauch was a free agent and coming off a terrible year, and Tino Martinez was a free agent and not the player he used to be. What did Cash do? Well, made one good move -- Justice for Veentura. One questionable move -- 7 years for a 31-year-old widley known to have been juicing. And two terrible moves: overpaid for a shitty Rondell White WAY overpaid (didn't give up much, but took on a ton of salary) for a shitty Raul Mondesi.
In the system and ready to go at that time: Nick Johnson (who had been a top prospect for years, and should have been leverage against Giambi), Marcus Thames, Juan Rivera.
Yanks and prospects
by PinstripePowerhouse on May 18, 2007 6:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Who gives a shit?
I heard that the Mariners sell the most hot dogs per nine innings. I guess that makes Bill Bavasi a genius. What is this, the fucking Apprentice?
by pfistyunc on May 18, 2007 7:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And, because I'm thinking about it
That didn't work, so the next off-season he signed Pavano and Wright, and flexed the money again by trading for Randy (and sending a lot of money to Az).
So there were a few good moves to replace certain parts, but most definitely weren't the best moves.
Yanks and prospects
by PinstripePowerhouse on May 18, 2007 6:16 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Not that
And lets get this straight, I think he has had made some really awful moves, but also has made some good ones.
by ReLaunch on May 18, 2007 6:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
FWIW
Signing Rondell White could have been avoided with Rivera in the system, too. Thankfully, that one didn't hurt too too much.
Yanks and prospects
by PinstripePowerhouse on May 18, 2007 6:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 
















