Correct me if I’m wrong, but Brett Gardner is no longer in our system.  Right?  Rule 5 draft?

you are thinking of Mike Gardner, a reliever.

I can’t belive we signed A-Rod to that huge contract that effectively blocks our 6th best prospect!  Seriously, does Suttle have other positions? 

Nice that there are 3 catchers on there.  You have to figure at least one of them will be spending time on the MLB roster by 2009.

it is pretty amazing how quickly the yankees addressed their organizational weakness at catcher.

Thanks yup - didn’t realize there were multiple Gardners. 

Interesting that Brackman makes the list, but none of the other four Tommy John guys did: Sanchez, Melancon, Cox and Garcia. Wonder where they’d slot in?

Overall, it’s a pretty good list, I’m just surprised how high he has Brad Suttle. But that’s probably to Sickels’ credit that he can take a horrid stint in Hawaii with a grain of salt.

I’d guess Romine is ranked above Montero just based on his projected ability to stay at catcher. Most analysts still think Montero ends up a 1B/DH it seems.

This is off-topic, I know, but pretending the Mitchell report didn’t happen is not working.  The Yankees have a major PR problem on their hands.  The Mitchell report was fairly useless, Mitchell himself had a major conflic of interest, and that the report only barely touched the tip of the iceburg in terms of who was using PEDs.  I think everyone knows this but, for Yankee haters, because no information has come out like the “facts” about Roger and Andy, the spin is in full effect.  From Met fans you get the assertion that history has been rewritten and they no longer lost the 2000 WS in 5 games, and Boston fans give everyone the impression that The Mitchell report validated that their core is pure as snow.  This is total BS and I will never for a second believe that..and neither do they but this story is like politics- all spin and the Yankees are being spun.  I hope some investigative reporter realizes just how large the market among Yankee fans will be for a book/expose involving the rest of MLB, especially the RedSox and Mets.  I also think the Yankees owe it to themselves and their fans to come out swinging on Mitchell, the press coverage, and the ivestigations lack of focus on other teams and regions besides NY and San Fransisco.

Suttle apparently played more at second than at 3rd in college. Don’t know if they have plans on ever moving him, but 2B is obviously plenty blocked as well.

This is off-topic, I know, but pretending the Mitchell report didn’t happen is not working.  The Yankees have a major PR problem on their hands.

Why should we worry about the PED problem with the Yankees in the context of other teams? I think the Yankees need to clean up their own house and stop worrying about how it makes them look in comparison to the Mets and the Red Sox. And so should the fans. I have zero interest in how many players on the Mets or the Red Sox were using PEDs, I just worry about the team I root for. I notice how most of the players named in the report are players the Yankees brought into their clubhouse from trades and free agency. I’m not advocating that the Yankees stop signing or trading for big name players, but maybe the front office should take into account the possible PED issues when looking into other prominent players they want to acquire and adjust their player acquisition philosphy going forward accordingly.

And Brad Suttle’s performance in the Hawaiian Legue was just pathetic, his inclusion on Sickel’s list is a surprise. I’d take him off and put one of the TJ surgery cases on this list.

Pags, where are you getting this stuff?  Mitchell himself has said that steroid use was pervasive.  The MSM is full of columns talking about how the names on the list are only the tip of the iceberg.  The average fan is responding to the report with a giant “so what.”  In an ESPN poll, a substantial majority of fans said they would vote Clemens into the HOF despite these allegations.  The universe is a lot bigger than your Mets and Sox fan buddies who want to give you crap about Andy Pettite.

Suttle is also a type 1 diabetic and has to reattach a catheter tube to his abdomen between innings. That might be a more remarkable obstacle to overcome than his rough stint in hawaii.

Suttle is also a type 1 diabetic and has to reattach a catheter tube to his abdomen between innings.

Whoa, that’s intense. We might have just found the one guy in the farm system that we can all root for. But given his health issues and his albeit limited on-field performance, I still remain skeptical of his future as a productive major league player. But would be quite happy to have him prove me wrong…

Suttle doesn’t appear to have great power—he’s scouted as more of a good line drive gap hitter—and his greatest weakness is listed as being his foot speed, so he is not a great candidate for left field or center either. But he reportedly has a gun, so if he develops power he could be a good candidate to move to RF down the line. But it seems he would have to become a very different hitter than he has thus far been to justify getting such a high rating on this list, I would think.

WilldThrill: I actually admire your ability to ignore other teams and their fans.  Unfortunately I don’t have that ability.  I am as annoyed by the RedSox or Mets success as I am by Yankee failure.  I enjoy seeing the pain on their fans faces when they fail and I detest seeing them happy for any reason.  I also think this is entirely logical if you really do love The Yankees.  Basically, the Yankees compete with these teams for fans and, therefor, $.  The Yankees have had massive success in this respect but that is all the more reason for them to vigorously defend their position- because everyone is out to get what they have.  So if the incremental fan decides to spend his money at Fenway or Shea, or watch NESN or SNY over YES, then that is doing damage to The Yankees and perhaps our MVP 3B wouldn’t be so inclined to stay in the BX. 

p.s. Will “The Thrill” Clark was actually my second faorite player growing up (to Donnie- I played 1B).

MC: when someone uncovers massive roid abuse in RedSox land involving names like Varitek, Ortiz, Manny, and (I pray) Curt The Shill, I will be the first to buy 10 copies as a stocking stuffer for all Bostonians I know.

Also, one of the more curious aspects of that report is how Mitchell was able to get such insightful email commentary from high up in RedSox management.  I wonder if he can get all emails related to contarct negotiations with Ortiz, Varitek, JD Drew, etc.  Then again, why would he want to- everyone one knows RdSox mgmt is careful of trading for roid guys who may influence their clubhouse full of upstanding citizens.

“Suttle is also a type 1 diabetic”

He’s on insulin!  Put him in the Mitchell report!

Seriously, wow.  I hope he makes it, just ‘cause.  Dannux, do you have a link to any info on him?

One of the most refreshing things about these prospect lists is that some of these prospects are basically blocked indefinitely at their positions (Brad Suttle being a good example), and I consider that a *good* thing.

I think this offseason has demonstrated that while the Yankees have some coveted prospects, those prospects are needed as starting players on the Yankees.  Trading guys like Hughes, Kennedy, etc, is effectively pointless, since they’re not young guys on the farm anymore, but projected starters.  Any sort of trade with our best prospects is basically a swap of starting-caliber players, and all the Yankees would be doing is robbing Peter to pay Paul.

If our farm system continues to improve, then eventually the team will be good enough that good prospects will simply have no position, making them much more expendable on our side in a trade.

I just googled around mostly. Here is a very sympathetic article about his insulin regimen:

http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/big12/stories/MYSA042006.4C.BBChorns.suttle.17bd5dc0.html

Thanks Dannux.

Thx for the article Dannux.  Amazing he can excel with such a large burden.  Hope to see him in pinstripes soon.  And sorry to be a downer with Post #7- I had to vent.

Hard to imagine an unsympathetic article on that topic.

“unsympathetic article”

From the National Review Online:  “PC Run Wild: Genetically Defective Cripple Takes Spot On Varsity Squad That Could Go To Normal Athlete”

Not too hard to imagine for the creative types (read: nutjobs) hanging out on this board, I guess.

“read: nutjobs”

Thank you! 

I myself am honored to be a part of the RLYW nutjob community.

Will “The Thrill” Clark was actually my second faorite player growing up (to Donnie- I played 1B).

Donnie Baseball and Will The Thrill made for a nice bookend set of first basemen on my favorite AL and NL teams. First base in the eighties was the spot for some sweet swinging and leather flashing players, Wally Joyner included.

From the National Review Online:  “PC Run Wild: Genetically Defective Cripple Takes Spot On Varsity Squad That Could Go To Normal Athlete”

Been lurking while you guys kick around Yankee prospect names I’ve never heard of, but I can’t help wondering: how many times a day do the words “National Review” and “genetically defective” occur in the same sentence? My guess is at least four figures.

Hey SSF, here’s a question I’ve been meaning to ask you, hopefully without it seeming hostile, ‘cause it’s not meant to.  What the hell are you always doing here?  I mean, are we really as smart and funny as we think we are that you ‘d prefer to hang out here rather than at a RS blog?  Or do you hang out at one of those, too, doing double duty?

Perhaps SSF feels about RSN the way I do about the left wing of the Democratic Party:  He can’t stand the people who agree with him.

Don’t you know that I’m secretly a yankee fan?

re post #7—PagsRags, avoid ESPN.com for the next few days.  I was beginning to be philosophical about all the Yankee-haters jumping on the Mitchell Report bandwagon and then I read today’s Jemele Hill column . . . my blood pressure spiked so high that I thought my eyes were bleeding.

Now, I need to vent—they can condemn Pettitte all they want but they can’t just choose to believe the trainer that he supplied HGH and then choose to disbelieve him about how often he supplied it.  And if an ESPN columnist wants to assert that Pettitte used HGH longer than for a couple of weeks, that writer has to have a plausible reason why Pettitte would’ve gone to someone other than McNamee for his HGH (and why McNamee wouldn’t have known about it).  Otherwise, she should just shut up.

OK, I have to take a shower now. But first…

- the size is just right for robust chatter w/o the noise
- I married into a Yankee family, so it’s not like a foreign language or anything
- It’s really boring talking with people you agree with; this is WAY more fun
- People at Sons of Sam Horn don’t seem to like each other all that much
- And… well, people here are reasonable. And smart and funny. And interested in baseball reality. There, I said it. OK?
- Finally, I’ve lived away from both cities for a long time, IMHO yanks and sox fans are more alike than they know or care to admit. Every city has knowledgeable die-hard fans, but they can be pretty hard to locate outside our sphere.

Rab—Only Pettitte knows what he really did. Hill is making assumptions, which she needs to be careful about, as in don’t just make shit up. But a larger point she’s making is that people need to be skeptical about denials or very limited admissions, which I think is 100% right. You want to believe Pettitte, and maybe he’s the wrong guy to pick on, but you can never know for sure who did what, unless the athlete spills his/her guts.

By the way, I know that a B+ prospect is still damn good, but can anyone objectively explain to my why they held up the Santana trade because they weren’t willing to give up a B+ prospect instead of a B- or C+ prospect?  We’re talking about Johan Freaking Santana.

creative types (read: nutjobs)

I take pride in this, thank you.

By the way, I know that a B+ prospect is still damn good, but can anyone objectively explain to my why they held up the Santana trade because they weren’t willing to give up a B+ prospect instead of a B- or C+ prospect?

well, we don’t know that the Yankees did or did not “hold up” the Santana trade.  there were conflicting reports about what the Twins were willing to accept.  there was no evidence that if the Yankees agreed to the reported asking price, the Twins would not have taken THAT offer back to the Red Sox to try and get even more.  and given the fact that no trade has been completed yet, i would guess that the Twins were NEVER serious about making a trade during the winter meetings.

just because Bill Madden said the Twins pitched Hughes/Melky/Hilligloss/ Marquez to the Yankees, does not make that a fact.  how many times were we told that the Red Sox and Twins were “very close” to a deal?

finally, just because Sickels rates a guy a B+ does not mean the Yankees rate him the same way.  i am pretty sure the Yankees don’t think Ian Kennedy is a B+ and they sure as hell don’t think Jackson is a B-.  2 different graders can have 2 different opinions of a player.  see the top of the thread where someone noted that Cano was rated a “B-” coming into 2005.

“By the way, I know that a B+ prospect is still damn good, but can anyone objectively explain to my why they held up the Santana trade because they weren’t willing to give up a B+ prospect instead of a B- or C+ prospect?  We’re talking about Johan Freaking Santana.”

The idea that “you don’t hold up a deal over [insert name of prospect here]” represents flawed logic.  You’re trading a package.  All of its parts have value.  The Yankees’ package included, in Phil Hughes, a recent A+ prospect, now successful major league pitcher.  They made it clear that they did so with great reluctance.  To decide that they would hold firm at that point, that they would upgrade the package no further, is a sensible stance.

Put it this way:  If there’s so little difference between a B and a B+ (that the Yankees should have just thrown in Kennedy) then why would the Twins let that hold up the deal?  I mean, we’re talking about Phil Freakin’ Hughes, whom every team in baseball has had a boner for since 2005.  By your logic, the Twins shouldn’t let the difference between Horne and Kennedy get in the way of this deal.

they weren’t willing to give up a B+ prospect instead

There are several popular theories:

(1) Hughes and Kennedy is too high a premium to pay for Santana
(2) At the time, if the Yankees traded Hughes and Kennedy for Santana, the rotation would have looked something like Santana, Wang, Mussina, Chamberlain, Igawa/Horne/Rasner, with Chamberlain having an innings caps around 150-160 IP. Since Pettitte has returned, that sorts of lessens the burden and perhaps they’re willing to revisit the talks they just penciled in 200 IP of around 4 ERA.
(3) Some of the front office didn’t want to trade Hughes in the first place, so the deal was held up.
(4) Santana’s ~$13M salary in 2008 is pushing the Yankees to or over their budget (which has been used to partly explain shopping Matsui.)

I think it’s bits and pieces of all 4, as well as a little reluctance to obligate $150M for 6-7 years for a pitcher soon to be on the wrong side of 30, even if he is Johan Santana. That, and I’m sure the Red Sox and Yankees would rather get into a bidding war when only money is involved (in the offseason) instead of when prospects are involved.  At this point though, I imagine it’s anyones guess.

I don’t have the link handy right now, but there was something in the Star Tribune about how the Yankees made Hughes unavailable after Pettite decided to return.  Makes some sense.

Tonights thread was really amusing. It’s stuff like that,that makes me glad I read it. And do my silly postings.
Which reminds me , we actually have 3 gardeners in the organization.
You forgot Hank’s brother in law.
Felix is it?

“- And… well, people here are reasonable. And smart and funny. And interested in baseball reality. There, I said it. OK?”

Flattery’ll get you somewhere, that’s for sure.  Thanks.  You too.

But a larger point she’s making is that people need to be skeptical about denials or very limited admissions, which I think is 100% right.

People also need to be skeptical about the evidence.  Two clubhouse flunkies, under threat of prosecution, telling investigators what they want to hear, does not constitute a complete and definitive history of PED use in major league baseball.  I’m not at all sure that I completely believe Pettitte’s story.  But I am sure that I believe there are dozens of McNamees and Radomskys that we don’t know about yet.  And that means hundreds more PED users.  Tell Jemelle to put that in her pipe and smoke it.

Felix is it?

Chauncey?

But I am sure that I believe there are dozens of McNamees and Radomskys that we don’t know about yet.

agreed.  every team in MLB has had dozens of PED users except for the Boston Red Sox, who have never had one.

Letter grades based off someone’s personal judgment = useless. Though obviously, the guy probably knows what he’s talking about.

i am pretty sure the Yankees don’t think Ian Kennedy is a B+

I agree, yup.  I would love to read the Yankees’ internal scouting reports and notes on Kennedy.  He’s an interesting guy.  His performance record is excellent, but his stuff doesn’t seem to live up to the numbers.  And it seems difficult to find comps for him.  You watch Hughes or Joba and think “Roger Clemens,” but Hughes doesn’t seem to engender similar comparisons.  Mike Mussina?  But Mussina threw a lot harder in his heyday, and velocity aside, Kennedy doesn’t even have a pitch as good as Moose’s knuckle-curve.

I don’t have the link handy right now, but there was something in the Star Tribune about how the Yankees made Hughes unavailable after Pettite decided to return.

I hope this is true.  Frankly, I think the Twins were stupid not to jump on the chance to acquire Hughes.  I’ve said it before, but the fact that making Hughes available didn’t swing the dealings in the Yankees’ favor, if not seal the deal, makes me wonder what the hell the Twins were thinking.  Hopefully the Twins regret this decision for a long time.

And think of all the teams that probably could have had Wang or Cano a few years ago.  For some reason, teams either underestimate the Yankees’ prospects, get greedy, or just don’t negotiate in good faith.  It’s their loss.

Hmm, seems it was Sid Hartman who reported the Hughes-off-the-table thing, so take that into consideration.  Anyway, here it is (I quoted the full text about Santana, you have to scroll down a bit on the actual page).

Sid Hartman

Twins General Manager Bill Smith said he was told by Yankee GM Brian Cashman that when lefthander Andy Pettitte decided not to retire and instead pitch in 2008, New York lost interest in trading for Johan Santana.

Well, my Yankees sources tell me that they are not going to give up pitcher Phil Hughes in any deal. Cashman doesn’t want to give up Hughes, who nearly pitched a no-hitter last year against Texas before having to leave because of an injury.

But no doubt the Yankees don’t want the Red Sox to get Santana, so there always is a chance they change their minds.

“every team in MLB has had dozens of PED users except for the Boston Red Sox, who have never had one”

Not true—the Sox had two: Gagne and Donnelly. But of course they had no idea when they acquired them and they would never have signed them if they knew, but this offseason they didn’t tender them contracts and let them walk right before the Mitchell report, but not because Mitchell leaked their names to the front office, because he would never do that, because he is so ethical. It was just a coincidence.

Murray Chass is a terrible journalist, but he rightly chastised Mitchell for his shoddy work today, pointing out that the investigation didn’t come up with a single name on its own—everyone in the report was either turned over by guys who pleaded to deals with the feds after getting busted, came from the previous BALCO investigation, or had tested positive in previous random testing. What was this guy doing all that time? He couldn’t even get Jose Canseco, Jason Grimsley, or anyone else to name more names? And how could he put in all these names without insisting on there being any corroborating evidence at all for a bunch of the players named?

Also, did anyone see this article:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2007/12/15/sports/baseball/20071216_MITCHELL_GRAPHIC.html
Apparently Lo Duca introduced as many as 13 guys to Radomski—you think perhaps Minaya knew this when he decided to go with Brian Schneider and his .600 OPS instead of Lo Duca?

As for all those worried about Kennedy being an A or a B, here is how Sickels defines the ratings:

“Grade A prospects are the elite. They have a good chance of becoming stars or superstars.

Grade B prospects have a good chance to enjoy successful careers. Some will develop into stars, some will not. Most end up spending several years in the majors, at the very least in a marginal role.”

I would say that Kennedy has a good chance to enjoy a successful career, may become a star, but is just as likely to be a marginal talent. B or B+ seems fair to me. If his control is really as good as it looked in September, then maybe he becomes Brad Radke in his prime. If his control is a little worse than that, maybe he is a Jeff Suppan type. If he has arm problems, he could falter and be out of the majors in 3 years. Seems like a B+ guy to me.

agreed.  every team in MLB has had dozens of PED users except for the Boston Red Sox, who have never had one.

I have to say, this is a pretty handy and amusing little sidebar to baseball’s meta-stories. Murray Chass still sucks, BTW. Was it Mitchell’s job to round up a list of users? If anything, he shouldn’t have named the ones he did.

Was it Mitchell’s job to round up a list of users? If anything, he shouldn’t have named the ones he did.

exactly.

was it his job to round up a list of users?  no, but that’s exactly what he did.

so i am not sure what you are arguing.  if you agree that he shouldn’t have released the names in what was obviously a pathetically incomplete list, then i don’t know why should chafe at my snarky reactions to the report.

and yes, murray chass does suck.

After a few days to reflect it becomes even more clear how much Mitchell failed to do a job that is useful for the sport.  He is a politician and a conciliator but, this report only succeeded at opening old wounds and increasing the divisions between factions that had been cooperating.

In his presentation, he emphasized that none of the problems that he found had occurred in the two years since Baseball instituted penalties for PED use.  No one remembers that any more.  He laid out a comprehensive framework going forward,.  No one cares.  All because he named names.

What Baseball needs most is to get past this problem and move forward. The best way to do that is to emphasize that these problems are in the past and assess whether the testing programs are cleaning up the game.  No one is talking about the last two years, either to laud their success or criticize their failures.  No one is writing anything about what to do going forward.

This report gave baseball hating sportswriters another opportunity to bash the game.  The presentation didn’t do anything to make the game look good or provide a path to that end.

I liked being a baseball fan back in the 1970s.  I could show up at a big league ballpark with ten bucks in my pocket, walk up to the ticket window and get a seat in the lower deck in the infield and enjoy my favorite game without fighting big crowds.  I didn’t have to deal with a scalper or buy partial season tickets until the 1990s.  If they keep throwing stuff like the Mitchell Report at us, maybe those days will return.

so i am not sure what you are arguing.  if you agree that he shouldn’t have released the names in what was obviously a pathetically incomplete list, then i don’t know why should chafe at my snarky reactions to the report.

Was I chafing? What’s the emoticon for chafing anyway?

In my mind, one of the more impressive things about Kennedy is the fact that he has consistently racked up high strikeout numbers at every level.  Also, he may not throw 100 like Joba but Kennedy does hit 91-92 with regularity.  If he shows good command and uses his breaking pitches well, that’s plenty good enough to be successful.

What’s the emoticon for chafing anyway?

This needs to be looked into immediately. And if one doesn’t exist it needs to be created. SSF, you may have stumbled upon something the internet doesn’t have. Take pride in your accomplishment.

Was I chafing?

ok, i may have misinterpreted the use of the word “handy”.  if not, my bad.

What’s the emoticon for chafing anyway?

i think it’s a smiley that is scratching its crotch.

I was thinking a smiley with legs that were blinking red.

In the crotch area that is. Although if you’re a runner you always risk the infamous nipple chafage, especially in cold weather, and even the armpit chafage, neither of which I’ve experienced.

knock on wood.

And if you have bad skin allergies, almost anything can chafe- elbows, thighs, back, a long list of more or possibly less interesting areas…

David Wells usually leads the league in CH/IP (chafing per innings pitched).

David Wells usually leads the league in CH/IP (chafing per innings pitched).

I would have guessed cheeseburgers per innings pitched. Shows how much I know.

Also, why is this board on mountain time?

maybe we crossed streams with the replacement level rockies weblog?

I tried to turn off Daylights Savings Time.  I think you have to change the daylight savings time setting in your account to fix that.

I’m hunting for a chafing emoticon now but no luck.

In other news, A-Rod has officially fired Boras and signed on with Guy Oseary (a show-biz agent, not a sports agent).  Makes sense, I suppose, since Rodriguez will never need to negotiate another baseball contract.

Also, MLBTR is reporting that the Yankees won’t let Melky Cabrera play winter ball.  They’re playing it up as implying a trade, but given Mleky’s atrocious September, invoking the “extreme fatigue” clause in the MLB/Caribbean winter league agreement sounds like a good idea to me.

Interesting.  So maybe I was wrong about Rodriguez’s comments about Boras being spin control…

I seem to recall the Yankees not letting Melky play winter ball last year too.  It didn’t seem to help though.

Also at MLB.com, Brian Roberts is admitting to steroids.  This is funny because Roberts has been the poster child over the last week, according to people like Gammons, of players “victimized” by the Mitchell Report.

(Don’t get me wrong; I don’t support Mitchell’s or MLB’s tactics.  I just like to see the wonks made to look stupid.)

This is funny because Roberts has been the poster child over the last week, according to people like Gammons, of players “victimized” by the Mitchell Report.

i don’t see what this changes about the wonks’ position.

the evidence in the report was hearsay.  just because it happened to be correct doesn’t make it ok.

Chaficon: some ideas

;<>
;[
;$

I think the last one is about right. Anyway, good for A-Rod, I thought his explanation of how he felt about the game 4 scoop was the most sincere and thoughtful thing ever to pass those purple lips.

Also at MLB.com, Brian Roberts is admitting to steroids.  This is funny because Roberts has been the poster child over the last week, according to people like Gammons, of players “victimized” by the Mitchell Report.

Get used to it. Not to be a broken record (which is what people say when they’re about to be a broken record) but this is how it works in Cycling: denial denial denial angrydenial lawyer involved litigationthreat denial denial… confession.

Yup, you make a good point.  But I’m responding to the wonks, not the report.  Much of the wonks’ tone is along the lines of, “This report is so absurd that it even makes cuddly Brian Roberts look bad.”