The 2008 New York Yankees

BetterManningNYG wrote:

i'm not entirely sure how it works with new stadiums, but i'm under the impression that the yankees don't have to pay the luxury tax during those years.

if that's true, it would explain the front-loaded contract.

it wouldn't explain the ten years, but that's a different issue...

you're right...i think the yanks are luxury tax exempt in 2009. they'll just pay the extra 40% luxury tax every other year i guess.

actually, the way the deal is structured is actually very smart with the yearly salary on the "cheap" side the last few years.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3156038

"It's up to Minnesota what they want to do and I assume they're still thinking about trading him," Steinbrenner said, according to the paper. "As far as what I'm going to do, I don't know. There's been a couple of brief calls. The door's not closed. I'm still thinking about it."

hank just likes hearing himself talk, doesn't he? i should go down to the bronx in a old timey reporters outfit and say i'm from the "aet message pit gazette" and would like a comment on (insert something here) just to see what he'll say.

JSBE wrote:

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3156038

"It's up to Minnesota what they want to do and I assume they're still thinking about trading him," Steinbrenner said, according to the paper. "As far as what I'm going to do, I don't know. There's been a couple of brief calls. The door's not closed. I'm still thinking about it."

hank just likes hearing himself talk, doesn't he? i should go down to the bronx in a old timey reporters outfit and say i'm from the "aet message pit gazette" and would like a comment on (insert something here) just to see what he'll say.

he'll probably be like what's your 10 club number and when are they coming to florida again. he'll do that before putting his cigarette out in your face..

BetterManningNYG wrote:

you mean like one of those old-school hats with a tag sticking up that says "PRESS" on it? try it out, see what comes of it...

as baseball fans, it's so easy for us to forget that talk rarely leads anywhere. if a trade happens, it happens... like cabrera to detroit or haren to arizona. there were no advanced rumors in either case.

when a rumor surfaces, it usually means that a trade was discussed but nothing came of it (e.g. matsui to the giants or ted williams for joe dimaggio).

and based on the returns for cabrera, haren, and matt garza, i think it's safe to assume that no team has made an offer so far that will even come close to landing them santana.

furthermore, with aaron rowand off the market, melky cabrera becomes even more valuable to the yankees. you need a CF that can cover territory, especially in yankee stadium. having santana on the mound does not make up for an outfield of matsui, damon, and abreu.

exactly one of those hats. my jacket will be tweed with the elbow patches and everything.

living in boston i totally understand that 9 times out of 10 it is all talk and no trade.

i can't view the cabrera trade the same way i view a possible santana trade because the tigers also got dontrelle willis who is still arbitration eligible for 2 more years (i think) and cabrera does not become a free agent until after the 2009 season. granted the tigers did give up a lot, but they got two young players that are under their control for another couple seasons.

as for the haren deal, i still don't get that one since haren was signed for cheap for another couple years. i'm not super familiar with the prospects the a's received, but i only think 1 or 2 are considered mid to top level (as opposed to elite).

garza for delmon young looked pretty even to me. the rays have a ton of OF prospects that can fill in, so they were trading away surplus in essence even if it was a player coming off a very good rookie season.

i agree with your reasoning about cabrera's value to the yanks, but then again hank seems to be ruling the bronx these days so actually baseball thought might just get thrown out the window.

Wasn't Bruney the one who also had an attitude problem and ripped into Torre and Guidry after he got sent down late in the season?

From Peter Abraham's blog:

"You can tell a lot about a player in bad times. As writers, we often remark about how some players are more quotable after losses because that’s when they’re the most honest.

So it was interesting to observe the reactions of Brian Bruney and Miguel Cairo today when they were taken off the roster. Bruney quickly packed his bags and stormed out of the room. “No I don’t,” he said when I asked him if he had a minute to speak.

Bruney then knocked over a chair on his way out of the room.

But at least he has a team to play for. Cairo was designated for assignment and could well be released. But he walked around, embraced all his teammates and then stood at his locker and said what it meant to him to play for the Yankees.

“It’s hard because I’ve been here three years and it’s a good group of people. The coaches are unbelievable and there’s a good manager. For me, it was an honor to be here,” he said.

Bruney is only 25, so let’s give him a pass. But it’s too bad he wasn’t around to see how Cairo handled himself.

As for Cairo, it made sense that he was the one to go. But I’m not sure the Yankees are a half-game out of the wild card race without him. Back in June, when the only other choice at first base was Josh Phelps, he filled in admirably.

JSBE wrote:

exactly one of those hats. my jacket will be tweed with the elbow patches and everything.

living in boston i totally understand that 9 times out of 10 it is all talk and no trade.

i can't view the cabrera trade the same way i view a possible santana trade because the tigers also got dontrelle willis who is still arbitration eligible for 2 more years (i think) and cabrera does not become a free agent until after the 2009 season. granted the tigers did give up a lot, but they got two young players that are under their control for another couple seasons.

as for the haren deal, i still don't get that one since haren was signed for cheap for another couple years. i'm not super familiar with the prospects the a's received, but i only think 1 or 2 are considered mid to top level (as opposed to elite).

garza for delmon young looked pretty even to me. the rays have a ton of OF prospects that can fill in, so they were trading away surplus in essence even if it was a player coming off a very good rookie season.

i agree with your reasoning about cabrera's value to the yanks, but then again hank seems to be ruling the bronx these days so actually baseball thought might just get thrown out the window.

dontrelle willis is a major x-factor. we all know what he's capable of, but i don't personally think he has a ton of value right now.

2005: 22-10 2.63 ERA 1.13 WHIP .243 BAA 151 ERA+
2006: 12-12 3.87 ERA 1.42 WHIP .274 BAA 112 ERA+
2007: 10-15 5.17 ERA 1.60 WHIP .294 BAA 83 ERA+ :eek:

1022.2 major league innings pitched before turning 26. the marlins mishandled the hell out of him. i guess he's young enough to recover, but who knows?


with the haren deal, i'm really just going by what i've read:

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=Anauqfnh78HmlHLUlsXCzKkRvLYF?slug=dbackswinbigbutashaulinb&prov=tsn&type=lgns

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/prospects/features/265320.html

it sounds like a pretty good haul. beane didn't need to trade haren. he just realized that there would be a huge market for him and that the A's wouldn't be able to compete with seattle or anaheim in 2008 with or without him.


garza for young is an even trade in the sense that it fills needs for both teams. personally, i'd rather have delmon young (all else being equal).

and my feeling is that you need to get significantly more for santana than you got for garza. would you say that the jacoby ellsbury package is significantly better than the delmon young package? i'm not trying to minimize the value of lowrie or masterson, but ellsbury vs. young seems like a toss up to me (i'm using ellsbury as an example instead of lester or hughes because ellsbury vs. young makes for the easiest direct comparison).

i guess it's possible that i'm placing too little value on matt garza. he had a very good year at age 23. but i wouldn't trade hughes for him. probably not kennedy either (although i'd have to think about that one). lester for garza? that's your call. you know more about lester than i do.


as for cashman, i'm cautiously optimistic that he's still in charge. as this offseason plays out, i'm become more and more convinced that hank steinbrenner is (hopefully) just a front for what's really going on. he's like the college kid who starts bar fights and then hides behind his larger friends while continuing to run his mouth.

Fighting Hellfish wrote:

Pettitte just admitted to his HGH use. Said he did it 2 times, over 2 days, then quit over feeling guilty about it, even though it technically was not a banned substance

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/baseball/mlb/12/15/pettitte.hgh.ap/index.html

it's disappointing but not at all surprising. at least he was man enough to admit it.

i just wish all the other HGH users around baseball would have been forced to do the same.

or we could just continue to believe that the problem is entirely yankee-centric. :rolleyes:

BetterManningNYG wrote:

dontrelle willis is a major x-factor. we all know what he's capable of, but i don't personally think he has a ton of value right now.

with the haren deal, i'm really just going by what i've read:

it sounds like a pretty good haul. beane didn't need to trade haren. he just realized that there would be a huge market for him and that the A's wouldn't be able to compete with seattle or anaheim in 2008 with or without him.

garza for young is an even trade in the sense that it fills needs for both teams. personally, i'd rather have delmon young (all else being equal).

and my feeling is that you need to get significantly more for santana than you got for garza. would you say that the jacoby ellsbury package is significantly better than the delmon young package? i'm not trying to minimize the value of lowrie or masterson, but ellsbury vs. young seems like a toss up to me (i'm using ellsbury as an example instead of lester or hughes because ellsbury vs. young makes for the easiest direct comparison).

i guess it's possible that i'm placing too little value on matt garza. he had a very good year at age 23. but i wouldn't trade hughes for him. probably not kennedy either (although i'd have to think about that one). lester for garza? that's your call. you know more about lester than i do.

as for cashman, i'm cautiously optimistic that he's still in charge. as this offseason plays out, i'm become more and more convinced that hank steinbrenner is (hopefully) just a front for what's really going on. he's like the college kid who starts bar fights and then hides behind his larger friends while continuing to run his mouth.

dontrelle is a total X factor. comerica is a pitcher's park, but i think the AL line-ups will eat him up. he'll be a serviceable #4 SP and being lefty doesn't hurt.

i agree that beane essentially knew the a's were not going to be all that great in 2008, so he sold while the SP market is hot and picked up a lot of minor league talent, although i really think the AL west is a very wide open race, granted beane can't spend to add talent.

i think the ellsbury, lowrie, masterson and a prospect or two offer is very solid. you have to take into consideration that all of the players acquired by minnesota would be under their control for 5-6 years at very cheap money. personally i think ellsbury has an ichiro-type ceiling, meaning he'll be a solid lead-off hitter, get on base a lot, steal 40+ bases, hit around .300 and play solid CF. lowrie is almost major league ready and can play either 2nd or SS and is in the pedroia mold. masterson is all potential, but he's a beast - a 6'6" sinkerballer. my mind is blank on the other possible pitching prospect is.

i'm not a huge lester fan, but i think he has a ton of potentially to grow. he just needs to cut down on his walks. if he can pitch close to what he did in game 4 of the w.s. then that is a young pitcher i want on my team. garza is young, so you really can't look at his one season and make a solid end all decision on him.

if the yanks were to give up hughes, cabrera and another prospect, i think that offer is stronger than the ellsbury offer, just because you would get two young players that have already contributed and are major league ready for opening day 2008. it is hard to compare hughes vs. ellsbury because obviously one is a pitcher and one is a CF.

i think hank is the real deal. i think he's just trying to be like his dad was back in the day and isn't getting all that much input or feedback from the baseball people.

The big thing about the pettitte admission is that it means McNamee was telling the truth about Pettitte. That alone doesn't mean he also told the truth about Clemens, (and Justice for that matter) but it sure doesn't help Roger