I think NOT signing Pettitte is a risk worth taking.  What we lose in security we gain in Hughes and IPK developing experience.  Spot starting IPK if/when injuries happen almost puts more pressure on him than if he’s automatically slotted as the swing man.

sure, i think the numbers are going to say that signing Pettitte is the best “on-field” decision.

but what if signing Teixeira really pushed them past where they felt comfortable taking the payroll?  what if Cashman promised Hal that he’d save money elsewhere as a condition for OK’ing the Teixeira money?

i am just making this up, i have no idea, but i could at least understand it.

Andy will be in the Steinbrenners’ suite at the new stadium waving to the crowd and announcing his comeback on May 3, 2009.  Suzyn Waldman will cry.  Oh my goodness gracious!  You read it here first.  (OK, you read it in the previous thread first, but you get the idea.)

This way, the Yanks only spend the $10M they’ve offered, but Pettitte doesn’t have to take a (pro-rated) paycut.

i am just making this up, i have no idea…

I have no idea either, but after the run-up to the Teixeira signing, my New Year’s resolution for 2009 is never to believe another word about the Yankees having a spending limit.

sure, i think the numbers are going to say that signing Pettitte is the best “on-field” decision.

I’m not sure.  If he’s only worth a win above Kennedy/Aceves, he’s not worth $10 million.

I’m not sure.  If he’s only worth a win above Kennedy/Aceves, he’s not worth $10 million.

that’s kindof what i meant: signing Pettitte provides the most wins “on field”, ignoring cost. 

sorry, that wasn’t clear.

I have no idea either, but after the run-up to the Teixeira signing, my New Year’s resolution for 2009 is never to believe another word about the Yankees having a spending limit.

yeah, i agree.

but what if the yankees could fill Pettitte’s spot from within, and somehow move Matsui (which i don’t think they can, but for the sake of argument)?

then they could potentially have added Sabathia, Burnett, and Teixeira AND come in with a payroll between $180-190M. 

would that be inconsistent with saying they have a spending limit?

So the Yankees could have had Beltran…and there were rumors of Cashman wanting Vlad over Sheff.  With a little tweaking, the 2009 lineup could have been:

1 Jeter SS
2 Beltran CF
3 Teixeira 1st
4 Arod 3rd
5 Vlad DH
6 Posada C
7 Cano 2nd
8 Swisher LF
9 Nady RF

Never signing Damon, not re-signing Matsui and then not signing Pettitte this year would pay for that lineup.

I’m not sure.  If he’s only worth a win above Kennedy/Aceves, he’s not worth $10 million.

I think the Yankees have already agreed he isn’t worth $10M, but are willing to give him a “True Yankee” premium.  That premium to them is worth about $2M (or so I’ve seen reported), but certainly not $8M.  Pettitte still has quite a bit of worth to the Yankees.  I think even with Pettitte, Hughes still gets to 100+ innings in the majors; assuming he earns it and isn’t hurt of course.  IPK will probably get close to 100 IP in the majors as well. 

What having Pettitte means is that you are protecting yourself from relying too heavily on Aceves, Giese, and Coke.  And also, it may allow you to trade one of them (not so much Giese) for a bat around the deadline if needed.  I guess I’m happy if they bring Andy back, but if they don’t it’s his own fault, really.

but what if the yankees could fill Pettitte’s spot from within, and somehow move Matsui (which i don’t think they can, but for the sake of argument)?

Pettitte may indeed have to wait for the Yankees to move some salary at this point.  If they do have a spending limit they’re butting up against.

there were rumors of Cashman wanting Vlad over Sheff

I’m pretty sure it was beyond that.  I think Cashman HAD Vlad signed, and then was told by Steinbrenner that Stein had signed Sheff instead and they didn’t need Vlad.  One of those things that probably led to Cash insisting on getting full control in his previous contract.

i don’t think we can play this game.

if the Angels didn’t have Vlad, maybe they up their bid past $200M for Teixeira, etc. 

or who knows, maybe the Angels are all in for Beltran the next year? 

we DO know that Cashman wanted Vlad over Sheff.  what happens from there is unknown.  maybe they win it all in 2005 b/c they have Vlad and the Angels don’t, and opting for Johnson over Beltran is remembered as a great decision that got them a title?

that’s not to say that passing on Beltran wasn’t disastrous.  it was.

just saying i am not sure we can pick and choose all the players we missed out on and assume they could all be together in the 2009 lineup.  too many other factors at play.

Anyone know when the TEX press conference will be on YES?

I’m having a hard time analyzing this objectively, as I have a soft spot for Andy.  That said, I can’t believe after the binge they just went on that they would snap the purse shut over a few million for an old stalwart. 

What I really wish—and I’m pretty sure I’m in the minority here—is that they had passed on Burnett and resigned Pettitte for in his slot.  I know, probably a weaker rotation, but talk to me in April 2011 when AJ gets a sore butt and doesn’t tell the FO about a car wreck with a supermodel.

I have no doubt that we have to resign Andy. Maybe he doesn’t worth it, but for only a year I really don’t have a problem. By the way, what is 10 million more for the Yankees?

talk to me in April 2011 when AJ gets a sore butt and doesn’t tell the FO about a car wreck with a supermodel.

The Burnett = Pavano comparison is so freaking tired. 

<u>2003-2008</u>
Pavano: 569 IP
Burnett: 874.7 IP

If signing Burnett precluded them from signing Teixeira, I could see a point that the Burnett contract was bad, but guess what, it didn’t.

kronic-that is an awesome lineup but I agree with yup that there are too many unknowns.

Kat O’Briens blog was interesting I thought regarding how the Tex negotiations came down.  It appears that it was a very unsure situation that morning from Cashman’s point of view and that they did indeed try to squeeze more out of the Yanks.  Like Boston, after they came in with the 8 year 180 million offer, they gambled and refused to go higher.  20 minutes later Boras called and said they had a deal.  Point is it’s probably valid that he preferred the Yankees all along, but to what degree he would walk away from x million dollars is unknown. I think the Yankee aura still exists and it’s good to see. The shame with Beltran is he wanted to play for the Yanks too, we are led to believe.

I hope they trade nobody until at least mid season in terms of outfielders, unless a really fair return is received. Matsui is the logical one I guess, but he still has a 20 homer 90 rbi bat if healthy and a decent average to boot.

I know, probably a weaker rotation, but talk to me in April 2011 when AJ gets a sore butt and doesn’t tell the FO about a car wreck with a supermodel.

this argument would carry more weight if Pettitte wasn’t coming off a season where he was probably injured for half the year.

doesn’t tell the FO about a car wreck with a supermodel

You know, Pavano deserves 99.99% of all the crap he gets, but I still do not for the life of me understand how trying to hide an auto accident so that he could make his scheduled rehab start fits in with the whole “doesn’t want the ball” meme.

By the way, what is 10 million more for the Yankees?

Well, $10M more is $14M for the Yankees.  But see the last sentence of post #3.

The Burnett = Pavano comparison is so freaking tired. 

2003-2008
Pavano: 569 IP
Burnett: 874.7 IP

Well, that’s one way of looking at it.  Another, I think more apt comparison would be looking at the years immediately preceding their signing:

Pavano ‘02-04 = 559.3 IP
Burnett ‘06-‘08 = 522.6 IP

Personally, I just don’t like the Burnett signing, even in a vacuum, regardless of its (non)-impact on Teixeira or anything else.

The problem is this, while Pettitte may not be worth $10M to the Yankees, he is worth closer to $13M on average.  So while it doesn’t make sense for the Yankees to go above (or even as high as) $10M, that also represents a big discount on Pettitte’s behalf.  It just may not make sense for either for him to re-sign.

As for IPK being #7 behind Hughes #6 I may be crazy but I’d rather see Aceves slot ahead of either of them.  He’s older, more polished, and I think he would benefit the least from more time in AAA.

I think Burnett is a real high Beta guy.  He could be anywhere from awesome to a complete disaster.

What I do like is that he has the stuff to be absolutely dominant.  Even if he only gives you 170 IP per year, if you can get him healthy goin into October, I love having three guys with great stuff like CC, Joba and Burnett in a playoff series.

Well, that’s one way of looking at it.  Another, I think more apt comparison would be looking at the years immediately preceding their signing:

Pavano ‘02-04 = 559.3 IP
Burnett ‘06-’08 = 522.6 IP

And how may players that have thrown that many innings in their last 3 seasons go on to only throw less than 150 innings total in their next 4?

Personally, I just don’t like the Burnett signing, even in a vacuum, regardless of its (non)-impact on Teixeira or anything else.

With this I agree.  I don’t like long term free agent pitching contracts in general.  C.C. you can argue was a necessity because of the Yankees failure to have developed an ace internally due to the Steinbrenner years.  A.J. (with all the pitching talent in the system right now) just seems like excess.  He’s an unnecessary risk.

If Andy has gotten really old in a hurry, and I’m not saying that’s the case, it would be much harder to take him out of the rotation then one of the others.

Anyone know when the TEX press conference will be on YES?

Someone needs to point me to these new capitalization rules. It seems random to me, but it can’t be.. right?

<iIf Andy has gotten really old in a hurry, and I’m not saying that’s the case, it would be much harder to take him out of the rotation then one of the others.</i>

Mussina was pulled out of the rotation pretty quickly not too long ago.

The problem is this, while Pettitte may not be worth $10M to the Yankees, he is worth closer to $13M on average. 

i agreed with this 100% about a month ago.

now, i am not so sure. 

looking around at all the free agents still on the board and who has signed for what, i think Pettitte’s “market value” is probably closer to the $8M + incentives that Randy Johnson got than $13M guaranteed. 

$10-11M seems pretty fair in this market, and it looks like Pettitte’s agents may have misread the market.  if he was willing to come down from $16M in the beginning, the Yankees would probably have given him his $11-12M in November.

Johnson is 71 years old, and threw only 56 IP 2 years ago. Pettitte’s been more durable and better in each of the past 4 years. Burnett is a lot better comparison for Andy.

SG,

Have you noticed how much more optimistic Cairo is on IP than Chone. I think Chone has Andy (and Burnett IIRC) throwing 167 IP. That seems awfully low to me, especially for Pettitte. 210 may be high, of course.

Burnett is a lot better comparison for Andy.

maybe Burnett is a better comparison in terms of projected performance in 2009 (i disagree, but for the sake of argument i’ll call them comparable), but they are certainly not at all comparable in terms of their market value.

Burnett had more than one offer greater than $64M.  several teams would have paid him around $15M year for 4 years. 

there is no one who will give Pettitte $15-16M next year.

right now, right or wrong, Pettitte is part of that second tier of non-elite FA’s that no one seems willing to pay anything for.

right now, right or wrong, Pettitte is part of that second tier of non-elite FA’s that no one seems willing to pay anything for.

I think the best comparision for Pettitte’s market value may be when Derek Lowe signs; especially if he signs with the Mets.  They are similar in age and both have the “workhorse” tag on them.  Lowe has put up better #‘s in recent years but Pettitte pitching in a strong AL East will help his rep.  Lowe’s injury slate is a little cleaner.  I’m not saying Pettitte has the same value as Lowe, but if (for the sake of argument) Lowe signs for 3/45 for an NY team, you can argue that Pettitte for 1/15 is similar value.  Garland may be a pretty good comp as well, though he is younger.

I guess all in all, we don’t know Pettitte’s value in the current market yet because the players most comparable to him have yet to sign.  His market value will probably end up somewhere between $8M-$12M though for a one-year deal, and we’ll see what happens then.  I doubt the Yankees will sign another pitcher besides Pettitte (if they don’t sign him they’ll let one of Aceves/Hughes/IPK win the job in ST), so no hurry.

Pettitte is part of that second tier of non-elite FA’s that no one seems willing to pay anything for.

I don’t think that no one is willing to pay anything for them, it’s that no one wants to be the first to ink one of the guys in this class. 

RJ didn’t really get anything started because he is a special case - $8M with the incentives.

I think Pettitte is waiting for guys like Garland, Wolf, and Perez to sign. He’ll likely be just as good as Garland next year, and should be compensated an extra $1M or $2M for only requiring a 1 year deal.

Have you noticed how much more optimistic Cairo is on IP than Chone.

Yeah.  CHONE is pessimistic not just in total innings but also in innings per start.  My guess is that Sean’s using a harsher attrition factor than I am.  When I do my depth chart projections I usually lower the innings for guys projected to pitch over 190 innings to ensure I get some of the back-end guys numbers into the overall projection.  For Pettitte, I’d probably project him around 180 innings next season.

Does this, from Joel Sherman, make any sense at all?

The Yanks have some surplus set-up relief to spice up a trade and I do not think it is inconceivable that they could try to do a huge trade that would include Wang, who is two years from free agency.

What could CMW possibly bring in a trade that they need more than CMW?

no, i don’t think it makes any sense.  Wang isn’t going anywhere.

also, he is 3 years from FA including 2009.

What could CMW possibly bring in a trade that they need more than CMW?

I’ve wondered if they could move Wang, but not now. They are finally set up in the rotation, assuming everyone stays healthy, and from the look of SG’s projections, they need him to have a shot at the AL East.

The time to move him would be when some combination of Hughes, Chamberlain, Brackman, Betances, McAllister and Bleich are forcing their way into the rotation. Burnett and Sabathia are there for a while, so if 3 of those guys are legit options (1 already is), then you can move CMW for a nice package.

What could CMW possibly bring in a trade that they need more than CMW?

Kemp from LA?  Would Wang be worth more than Kemp right now for a team that just lost some pitching (assuming Lowe doesn’t go back, which looks to be true)?  Especially as Torre really likes Wang?  I don’t know if Wang for Kemp straight-up makes sense for either team, but is it a starting point (and no, I wouldn’t then ALSO include Cano)?

Anything else?  Hmm.  If there would be a way to get him into a Sizemore deal (I’d be willing to include Cano and AJax in that deal as well), or a Granderson deal (I would include AJax in that one) that would be nice.  Value-wise, we may be getting close, though I don’t know if needs-wise that would make sense for Cleveland/Detroit.

If the Yankees were to move Wang, they’d kinda have to bring back Pettitte…

Also, Wang is 3 years from free agency, if not 4 years.  I’m not positive how much of his service time he used this year since he spent a half the season on the DL.

The time to move him would be when some combination of Hughes, Chamberlain, Brackman, Betances, McAllister and Bleich are forcing their way into the rotation

At that time he’ll be a FA. Wang is very underrated because he is not a strikeout pitcher, but he has been one of the best pichers in all baseball for the last 4 years. I rather buy low on Wang and resign him now to a cheap contract than trading him now that his value is low.

Also, Wang is 3 years from free agency, if not 4 years.  I’m not positive how much of his service time he used this year since he spent a half the season on the DL.

You get 3, or 4 years of arbitration (based on if you were a super-two) right?  This was Wang’s second year of arbitration eligibility, so he would be 2011, probably (pretty sure he was a super-two last year).  Of course, if he pitches like we expect him too (around 200IP, ERA around 4, probably 16+ wins) he’ll likely get $10M next year in arb, unless the Yankees sign him to a long-term deal.

There’s basically one more need for the Yankees; an upgrade in CF.  Given that they got Tex, I’m not really up for getting Cameron, which to me means a long-term solution.  So Kemp, Granderson, or Sizemore.  I’d be willing to trade Wang to get one of those…though Sizemore would take a lot more to get him.

Sizemore was what I was thinking too.  But nothing short of that.

I can envision a scenario whereby Wang has a typical ‘09, Joba’s development proceeds apace, CC+AJ have years worthy of their contracts, Hughes and Kennedy show they can get MLBers out consistently, and Brackman/Betances are knocking on the door.  Then (and there are certainly a lot of conditions here), Wang could go in a next-offseason package to fill one of the OF spots that will be vacated by Damon/Matsui/Nady free agency.

You get 3, or 4 years of arbitration (based on if you were a super-two) right?  This was Wang’s second year of arbitration eligibility, so he would be 2011, probably (pretty sure he was a super-two last year).  Of course, if he pitches like we expect him too (around 200IP, ERA around 4, probably 16+ wins) he’ll likely get $10M next year in arb, unless the Yankees sign him to a long-term deal.

You are free agent eligible if you aren’t under contract and you have 6 years of service for a MLB team. 
You are arbitration eligible if you aren’t under contract and you have 3 years of service for a MLB team (unless you are a super 2).

Wang entered last season with around 2.2 years of service time, the problem is I’m not sure how much service time he accrued last year.  I think there is a difference between the 15 day DL and 30 day DL.  I also believe that service time is accrued from the start of the season up until September (time on the expanded roster doesn’t count) so it is basically a 5 month season.

Given that Wang should be close to 3 years right now but I think he may be a little bit under.  If he is just under 3 I believe that means that the earliest he could reach free agency (assuming no more injuries) would be after the 2012 season.

But I’m not 100% on these rules.  They are so obscure and MLB doesn’t do a good job making the explanations available to fans like us.

Sizemore was what I was thinking too.  But nothing short of that.

You wouldn’t do Wang for Granderson?

I can’t see the Yanks moving Wang unless they get an even better, more durable SP in return.  Since the chances of that are about nil, Wang’s not going anywhere.

The Yanks have improved their staff, but injury concerns will always be at the forefront when you are going to depend on Burnett and CC, who is healthy but put some mileage on his arm this past year.  Joba has a history of injury concerns and Hughes can’t seem to stay healthy.  Other than a freak running injury, Wang has stayed pretty healthy.

I hope Wang stays put.

But I’m not 100% on these rules.  They are so obscure and MLB doesn’t do a good job making the explanations available to fans like us.

Yeah, it seems *unlikely* he could go to arbitration 5 years before becoming a FA.  But you’re right that given the complexity of the rules, he could.  BTW I reread my post on it, and I meant AFTER the 2011 season I think he’s a FA, not before.

Other than a freak running injury, Wang has stayed pretty healthy

Didn’t Wang miss the end of 2005 with shoulder surgery?  Then he missed the beginning of 2007 with another injury; I think arm related, but fairly minor.  IIRC, he had some injury issues in the minor leagues as well.  I love CMW, but I don’t know if he “has stayed pretty healthy”.

Yeah, it seems *unlikely* he could go to arbitration 5 years before becoming a FA.  But you’re right that given the complexity of the rules, he could.

There are enough smart people here.  I’m sure one of them can tell us if I am completely off base.

I did some googling and I was wrong.  Everything I said about service time still applies but I was wrong about Wang’s service time.  I saw it listed as 2.159 on Cot’s but I mistakenly though that was fraction of a full year.  I’ve since learned here…

http://thecubreporter.com/site/cubs-service-time

That the notation is 2 year and 159 days where 172 days makes up a full season.  Since that is the case Wang easily passed 3 years of service time in 2008 and should be a free agent after 2011.

Still, it is 3 years until free agency, not 2 that Joel Sherman listed.

You wouldn’t do Wang for Granderson?

This is POOMA stuff, but fun to think about.  That would be a tough call.  IIRC, Granderson regressed a little last year.  I don’t think I’d do it this year.  But, per my 39 above, if the rest of the staff flourishes and the young guys are the real deal, I’d do it to help fill the 2010 OF holes.

anyone know anything about these Cuban players who have defected, particularly the OFer?

At that time he’ll be a FA.

and should be a free agent after 2011.

So you’d need 3 of Chamberlain, Hughes, Kennedy, Betances, Brackman, McAllister, and Bleich to be legit starters by the start of the 2011 season to be able to trade a relatively cheap CMW that offseason. I can certainly see that happening, although by that time CMW would likely be making a lot of money.

Why do you guys love Kemp so much? In 2007 Wang was worth 7.3 WARP. Kemp’s not going to be worth that. Yes, I understand he is cheaper and younger, but he is generally rated as below average defensively, and that is when he is in what should be his prime years defensively. He OPSed 10th among CFs last year. Mike Cameron was better offensively and defensively than he was last year. I am open to the idea that he will progress, but who thinks he will be better than Wang? And do you guys think Kemp would be worth more relative to Melky than Wang would be relative to IPK or Aceves? I don’t get it.

Why do you guys love Kemp so much? In 2007 Wang was worth 7.3 WARP. Kemp’s not going to be worth that.

Well, part of it is that Wang’s not going to be worth that either.  Using Chone’s database - and finagling the numbers a little to get Wang’s IP up to around 150 per season (on average) over 5 years - I think it looks like Wang projects to 11 WAR over the 5 years and Kemp projects to 12 WAR (I figured he was in the middle of “average” and “poor” defensively).

I think if they trade Wang they *do* need another pitcher, whether it is Pettitte or Sheets or ...?  I’m also not sure if Kemp would be enough for Wang, and I thought I made that clear above.  My thought is Kemp improves CF this year, and then if AJax progresses well Kemp would likely hit well enough (and defend well enough) to take a corner OF spot in 2010.

Anyway, the question was, “what could Wang bring back that would make it worth trading him?”  I see a possible match with LA.  I think there’s a possible match in Detroit as well, though part of that depends on whether they think they are a contender next year.  Sizemore is just a pipedream, but…

the whole thing with Kemp (and i don’t really watch the NL, so this is just from what i have read) is that he is not a CFer, he just plays one on TV.

so, if he’s not going to stick in CF, he’s probably not going to be a star.  he’s young and cheap and would certainly look great in pinstripes even in one of the corners, but i don’t think that is worth CMW.

so, if he’s not going to stick in CF, he’s probably not going to be a star.  he’s young and cheap and would certainly look great in pinstripes even in one of the corners, but i don’t think that is worth CMW.

By UZR anyway, he was -1 last year in CF (-1.5 if pro-rated to 150 games).  He isn’t likely to get better (though he could a little), but isn’t likely to get much worse over the next few years.  HBT doesn’t have arm-ratings for 2008 yet (on the player-pages at least), but it looks like in the past he’s been about average, or a little below, for CF.  So basically as a defender in CF, he’s low-average, I’d say.  Probably a little better than Swisher or Damon at least.

Again, the question was, “What could CMW possibly bring in a trade that they need more than CMW?”.  Well the Yankees need a CF, and they probably have a need for an OF in 2010 and beyond, and they have a need to get younger.  Kemp satisfies all of that, and LaD is a place I could see having a need/want for Wang.  That’s not to say I would swap them straight-up.  I guess when I brought it up one of the things I was asking (if obliquely) was, “what else would we want”, if that were to be the centerpiece of the trade?  If the Dodgers don’t have anything (that we think we could get), then no, I wouldn’t do the trade.

Granderson might make more sense even.  The Tigers NEED pitching - both starting and relieving - and the Yankees need a CF.  I have no idea if the Tigers have a replacemnt for Granderson close to ready.  Most of the drop in Granderson’s value last year is because he lost about 20 runs of value in defense.  I’d expect him to bounce back in that.

If I were Detroit, I would want Joba in any deal for Granderson, along with one from a group of Betances or Brackman and a replacement CF, either Melky or Gardner.  Granderson will be 28 next season and is under their control for three more years.  Why would they trade him straight up for Wang?

Why would they trade him straight up for Wang?

I didn’t say they would; I noted they needed starting AND relieving.  I suppose for clarity I should have went a step further in noting the Yankees have an abundance of relief pitching as well (which we all know).  I think I mentioned somewhere above I’d be willing to trade AJax w/ Wang (and a reliever or two) for Granderson.  I also noted in my last post that I don’t know if they have a replacment for Granderson close to ready; if they do they would be more likely to trade him.  Also the Yankees may be able to take some salary off of Detroit’s hands; though I don’t know if if they have any contracts they are willing to shed that the Yankees would also be willing to take. 

If you were Detroit you probably also wouldn’t have resigned Rogers, have signed Willis to an extension, etc.  So yes, I would hope for a little more of Detroit not being smart in this, as well.

CF is a need, but there aren’t any good solutions. There won’t be many good free agent options anytime soon. Either Swisher or Melky will be the starting CF in 2009. Melky did well in winter league, he will probably at least get a platoon opportunity with Swisher. Austin Jackson will surely get a chance before the team makes any longer term commitments in CF. The big need right now is for a solid utility infielder.

I believe Damon is a better CF than Swisher.  The Yanks could easily play Damon in CF for 50-60 games, Swisher for 20-30 and Melky/Garnder for the rest - depending upon whether either shows any ability to hit or reach base with any sort of regularity.

As for Granderson, I was merely trying to point out that Detroit would have to be overwhelmed by top notch talent to trade him given his age and status.

“That said, I can’t believe after the binge they just went on that they would snap the purse shut over a few million for an old stalwart.”

This is rather like the sorites or “heap” paradox - how many grains of sugar can you take from a heap of sugar before it’s no longer a heap?  At some point the team will run out of money - we don’t know e.g. if the binge has already used up the nominal contingency fund.  If not, and assuming there’s no further hole in the belt, I’d rather call it a feast and wait to see if some irresistible morsel - say a wafer-thin mint - appears during the season.

As for Granderson, I was merely trying to point out that Detroit would have to be overwhelmed by top notch talent to trade him given his age and status.

I guess I still think of Wang as top-notch talent, and he does share with Granderson the fact that they are both team controlled for 3 more years.  I figure that Wang+AJax would be top-notch, though you can argue about relative values, etc.  Sorry if I went overboard; I’m just trying to throw out some ideas and sometimes I think I get taken *too* literally, though that’s likely a problem with my writing style.

Boston offered Ellsbury and Bucholz for Hanley Ramirez and could you believe the Marlins didn’t jump at the chance

I’d give Wang, Melky and Kennedy straight up for Hanley.

I’d give Hughes too

I’d give Brackman, Betances, Jackson and Kennedy for Hanley.

I’d give Wang, Melky and Kennedy straight up for Hanley

any package for Hanley has to start with Joba….AND Hughes….AND Jackson….And ???

we are talking about what, the most valuable property in baseball? 

it’s probably close between him and that absurd contract that Longoria agreed to.

The other side of the heap paradox is the tipping point paradigm: it makes no sense to spend money on something unless you spend enough to get what you want. 

If the last few years have taught us anything, it’s to look at least seven deep in the rotation.  Given the injury histories of Burnett, Hughes, and Chamberlain, the innings limit on Chamberlain and Hughes, and the uncertainty that Hughes, Kennedy, or Aceves will get it together this year, I think it’s worth paying Pettitte to increase the likelihood that the money you’ve spent on Teixeira, Sabathia, and Burnett is going to pay off.  I don’t think it’s going to retard Hughes’s progress.  If he’s healthy and effective, he’ll get all the innings he can handle.

Likewise, barring a trade to upgrade centerfield, I think having four good players for three slots is a good problem to have, so I’m in favor of keeping Nady.  The ‘98 Yankees were always sitting one of Strawberry, Raines, or Curtis (you could add Davis in there, but he and Strawberry managed to alternate their DL time).

Bebop, where did you read about Ellsbury and Bucholz for Ramirez?

Oh—it’s all over SOSH.

If the last few years have taught us anything, it’s to look at least seven deep in the rotation.

Exactly.  Which is why any thought of trading Wang—if it were actually being considered—makes little sense.

The rotation, while strong, is still an injury away from trotting out rookies 2 out of every 5 days.  And then we’re gonna try to get by without CMW too?  The starting lineup, especially with Teixeira in the fold, is less fragile.  I think the team could better withstand a 2-month A-Rod injury than a 2-month injury to one of CC, AJ, Joba.

“the tipping point paradigm”

I would naïvely think that our chance of winning WS is linear at this level.  Trading Melky for Santana to give us a prohibitive short-series edge might be a different story, but where’s the tip in making the playoffs (here random fluctuations are surely larger than Pettitte vs the depth chart) or advancing in the post-season (where I would be surprised if Pettitte would pitch in likely scenarios)?

I agree completely with Ed about keeping Nady, Swisher, Damon and Matsui if we are nor getting something valuable in return or if they trade Matsui to sign Manny. Otherwise I think is wise to keep them.

The rotation, while strong, is still an injury away from trotting out rookies 2 out of every 5 days.  And then we’re gonna try to get by without CMW too?

Unless I’m missing something they have 2 rookies penciled into the rotation right now.  That’s why a lot of people think Pettitte is a really good idea, even if they have to pay $12M-$13M.

Using Chone’s database - and finagling the numbers a little to get Wang’s IP up to around 150 per season (on average) over 5 years - I think it looks like Wang projects to 11 WAR over the 5 years and Kemp projects to 12 WAR

How does that work? In 2007 Wang was 7.4 WARP. In 2006 he was 7.5 WARP. In 2005 he was 3.5 in half a season. He is only 29. He has one ankle injury and he now is projecting out to less than 1/3 his average value over his last 3 complete seasons?

Ed 66 via MLB trade rumors
Red Sox Attempted To Acquire Hanley Ramirez
By Tim Dierkes [December 29 at 9:38pm CST]
According to Jon Heyman and Tom Verducci of SI.com, “the Red Sox made a play to re-acquire Marlins superstar Hanley Ramirez after losing out to the rival Yankees for star free agent Mark Teixeira.”  The Marlins listened, but no agreement was reached and talks have ended.  The Marlins coveted players such as Jacoby Ellsbury and Clay Buchholz, but they’d need to be bowled over to trade their young shortstop. 

Ramirez, 25, is signed at a discount through the 2014 season.  Juan C. Rodriguez says trading him would make no sense for the Marlins.

Unless I’m missing something they have 2 rookies penciled into the rotation right now.  That’s why a lot of people think Pettitte is a really good idea, even if they have to pay $12M-$13M.

Well, technically, they have zero rookies pencilled into the rotation.

Unless I’m missing something they have 2 rookies penciled into the rotation right now.

you are missing that Joba is not a rookie.

Um, neither Joba nor Hughes are rookies at this point.  They may not be “proven veterans” a la Joe Torre, but neither are they just coming up from the minors either.

Ed 66 via MLB trade rumors
Red Sox Attempted To Acquire Hanley Ramirez

In a similar story, the Yankees attempted to trade Ian Kennedy and Brett Gardner for Tim Lincecum.  The Giants listened, but no agreement was reached and talks have ended.

I wouldn’t give away IPK AND Gardner for Linceum either plus a c prospect perhaps.

According to Fangraphs Arod had a value of 27.6 million last year and Tex 30 million.

Um, neither Joba nor Hughes are rookies at this point.  They may not be “proven veterans” a la Joe Torre, but neither are they just coming up from the minors either.

Right.  But I hardly put them in the same category of reliability.  Joba, innings cap notwithstanding, can reasonably be counted on to pitch like a #2 starter.

Hughes is more of a question mark.  My point was that Wang can’t/shouldn’t be removed via trade from a rotation that is already one injury away from depending on 2 unproven youngsters who pitched poorly last year (assuming Hughes+IPK).

Absolutely. Can’t we just go out and play one full season with a reliable and deep rotation? Additionally, even if everyone is so excited to trade Wang, why would we trade him now when his value is at an all time low due to his freak injury last year? If he goes out and posts a 9-3 record and a 3.70 ERA in the first half, I am sure that he will be worth a lot more than he is now. I’d rather we not trade him, but if he is going to be moved it might as well be when his value is higher than it is now.

Additionally, even if everyone is so excited to trade Wang, why would we trade him now when his value is at an all time low due to his freak injury last year?

I think this is where we’re getting a disconnect.  B-Man posted something he found on another site about trading Wang, and asked, “what could he bring back that would be more valuable” (asked in an incredulous tone).  I’ve been trying to do that, as part of the debate.  I’m not “excited to trade” him.  But I had read someplace too that the Yankees could look to trade him, so if he is going, what would we want back for him (that we could reasonably get)? 

Way, WAY up above I posted Kemp, Granderson, or Sizemore.  The Indians aren’t trading Sizmore so that’s out.  I *can* see where some trade with Wang and Granderson being the key players could work, and I’m not sure if I would be opposed to it.  Kemp, I would want more back from as well, just not sure what the Dodgers have that they’d be willing to trade.  Trust me, if the Yankees open with Wang as the #2/#3 starter, I’ll be happy as a clam.

i don’t think anyone wants them to trade CMW except for Joel Sherman.

Right.  But I hardly put them in the same category of reliability.  Joba, innings cap notwithstanding, can reasonably be counted on to pitch like a #2 starter.

You probably would have said the same thing about Hughes last year and it wasn’t true then either.  Joba isn’t proven as a starter.  Just like Hughes last year, Joba can still fail or even if he doesn’t fail, struggle.

Young pitchers are very inconsistent.  Joba can’t be relied on to hold the rotation spot the entire season.

If Joba stays healthy, he will have no problem holding a rotation spot for an entire season.  His stuff is just too good and he can get away with having shaky command every now and then more so than Hughes or Kennedy.  Have you ever seen Joba get pummeled?  At worst, last season, he had problems with walks.  There is absolutely no reason to think Joba cannot pitch 150 innings of 3.80-4.00 ERA, and that’s nowhere near a best case scenario.  The main thing for Joba, as I mentioned earlier, is health.

I agree Joba has better stuff than Hughes and I agree he should be able to hold down the #5 spot, and I agree he could reach those numbers but they can’t be counted on.  I was talking to the guy who said…

Joba, innings cap notwithstanding, can reasonably be counted on to pitch like a #2 starter.

I don’t think Joba is as likely to fail as Hughes was last year but it is possible that he does fail.  Buchholz had better stuff than Hughes and looked great in limited action as a starter in 2007 but yet he still put up that 2008.  No one should give up on Clay.  Like Hughes he is far from done but at the same time you can’t say something like that isn’t possible in 2009 for Joba.

A young pitcher who has 60 something career innings as a starter can’t “reasonably be counted on to pitch like a #2 starter” for a full season.

Joba may not be a rookie but he is still unproven as a starter.

I think this is where we’re getting a disconnect.

Got it. That makes a lot more sense. OK, then. Sorry to be a little snippy. I hope that we are all happy as clams come April, then.

“I wouldn’t give away IPK AND Gardner for Linceum either plus a c prospect perhaps.”

Am I reading this correctly? You would NOT trade IPK and Gardner for TIM LINCECUM?

“Am I reading this correctly?”

I suspect that’s a parody of unrealistic trade assessments made by partisan fans.

You probably would have said the same thing about Hughes last year and it wasn’t true then either.

If I had said or did say that, I hope the rest of you would’ve jumped down my throat.  Joba has dominated major league hitters, albeit in short spurts, in a way Hughes never has.

Perhaps my “reasonably can be counted on to pitch like a #2…” formulation wasn’t quite what I meant.  What I meant was it’s not inconceivable that he could be that good in ‘09.  And I think we can all agree that we have more confidence in his ‘09 success than Hughes or IPK.

So, in the context of pondering a Wang trade, what I was trying to say is that we’re one injury away from having to trot out question marks (whether they have actual rookie status or not) 2 out of every 5 days.  While you can’t necessarily take Joba awesomeness to the bank, there’s a level of comfort with him that there isn’t with Hughes and IPK.

Sorry to be a little snippy.

No worries; a lot of people think I’m off my rocker!

While you can’t necessarily take Joba awesomeness to the bank, there’s a level of comfort with him that there isn’t with Hughes and IPK.

I have more confidence with Hughes as a #5 this year than Hughes as a #4 last year.  Though if he cracks a rib again there’s nothing you can do about it.  All we have are “reports out of Arizona” and such, but it seems his fastball is as good as - maybe better than - ever, and sounds like he’s refined/scrapped some pitches that weren’t successfull last year. 

Another year under the belt, and less pressure…last year Hughes had to be throwing 6 innings a game to an ERA of 3.5 for everyone to be happy.  This year I think if he has 5 a game with an ERA of 4 everyone will be ecstatic.

The main thing for Joba, as I mentioned earlier, is health.

And no midges.

A young pitcher who has 60 something career innings as a starter can’t “reasonably be counted on to pitch like a #2 starter” for a full season.

Fortunately, they don’t need him to pitch like a #2 for a full season, given the rotation currently in place.  This year will, hopefully, show how well he does pitching a full season as a starter.

Perhaps my “reasonably can be counted on to pitch like a #2…” formulation wasn’t quite what I meant.

Sorry for jumping all over you.  I’m not used to posting here yet. Most people here are a hell of a lot smarter than the place I normally post.  I guess I’m also still sensitive from last year.  I tried to warn everyone last year that Hughes and Kennedy could still fail in 2008 and that along with Mussina and Pettitte there were a lot of question marks in the rotation and the Yankees needed all of them to work out.

My bad.