I would sign Teixiera, and then try to sign Burnette and Lowe to 4 year deals. If I can't I try and trade for a CF and use Hughes and Kennedy as much as I don't like them. At least they aren't costing a lot and maybe they improve.
I think everybody agrees that 300 wins is no longer a requirement for the HOF. Nobody else is going to achieve that after Johnson for a long time. It's just not very attainable with the way pitching has become. The big things Mussina has is winning percentage and wins over losses. Both as they compare to his competition and doing it in the steroids era. Like I said, the pundits on ESPN all fee he gets in and at least two of them have votes.
But you won't get a legit Cy Young candidate for less than 6 years. So why is Lowe a better risk than Sabathia? Though I give you credit for answering my question, even though your answer focused more on pitching than offense, which is what you said you'd increase yesterday. :wink: As for Tex, how far would you be willing to go? He's looking at a 6-year deal too. Are you willing to lock him in for 6 years but not Sabathia? (Personally, I'd give it to both of them.)
Don, hes got you there. You cant say you wont give CC 6 years and then turn around and give lowe 4. Alio, of course Don would be willing to give Tex 6 and CC 6 because his main point is you dont give a PITCHER 6 years. I like playing arbitrator....as you were fellas..........
Frankly, I'd let someone else pay "Barry Zito money" to Derek Lowe. The Yankees, for sure. Just not the Red Sox, please. Might be that my last memory of him was as a pitcher that couldn't stick around in the starting lineup and then miraculously became an amazing starter through the ALDS, ALCS, and WS. Even before that, I remember him as a lights-out closer who came back the next year and blew saves to drive you nuts. Then, somehow, he morphed into a 20-game winning starter. There's too much up and down in the Derek Lowe I remember from his days in Boston. I'll say this for him - he's the anti-Pavano. He'll stay healthy.
Well, here is another thing that is sticking in my craw. Wang had 38 wins in '06-'07 and an era of 3.62. Sabafatso had 31 wins and an era of 3.21. We are willing to give Sabathia 140 mil so does that mean we give Wang 120? If not, why not? Before he got hurt last year he was on pace to probably get 19 again at least, probably more. Sabathia certainly didn't, not even by pitching all those easy games in the NL. And you're right, I don't like 6 year contracts for pitchers. Neither do the Yankees, they have said that before which is why I am surprised they are letting that idiot do it. Other than Mussina, the names that come to mind are Brown, Zito, Hampton..I am sure there may have been a few others and they probably fall into the same category. I was willing to do it last year for Santana because he keeps himself in shape at least.
Look, maybe I'm not making my point clearly enough. I wouldn't want to give Sabathia 6 years. I wouldn't want to give 6 years to Teixeira. I would give it to them if that's what it took to get them in pinstripes. The fact is, we need more great arms in the rotation. We're fighting the Red Sox, Rays, and possibly Toronto over the next few years. Even Baltimore has shown a desire lately to rejoin the race. Over the next 5-8 years the AL East is going to be the toughest division in baseball. We need to make big moves to stay in the thick of it. That involves bringing in Sabathia now. That would make our rotation: Sabathia, Wang, Chamberlain, Hughes, Someone Else. See the problem there? We still need another quality starter for the 5 position, and what happens if health plays a factor? The Yankees must overspend this winter out of necessity. Sure, it'd be nice to tell Sabathia "Look, we'd like to have you, but only on a 4-year deal, and only if you're willing to take $75M," but that isn't going to convince him to come somewhere he doesn't especially want to play. Same with Teixeira. Same idea with Lowe (though obviously different numbers.) That's the downside of being publicly desperate. But it's the spendiest team in sports. May as well go after the best talent if you're going to spend it anyway.
It is a requirement for a compiler like Mussina. He's never been even top 5 in the game, so for him to make the HOF he needs to hit certain milestones. 300 wins, 3,000 Ks, something like that. His shot comes because he's been very good for a long time. He was never "great". Players like him need to reach the benchmark numbers to get in.
That I disagree with. A compiler was Don Sutton. A compiler doesnt win 20 games at age 39 which turns out to be the last year of his career. If he was a compiler he would have come back to get to 300 like you said. I dont think that he is HOF worthy. He was always very good and ranked up their with the top pitchers but he was never the best pitcher and that what hurts him. What also hurts him is that he pitched in 2 strike seasons. In 94 he was 16-5 in only 24 starts with a 3.09 ERA. Only 60 earned runs in 176+ innings. This might have been his best year but the end was ruined by the strike. The in the shortened 95 season he went 19-9. Here is the link to his stats including where he ranks. http://www.baseball-reference.com/m/mussimi01.shtml Baseball Reference has him as a Hall of Famer. The more I look at his stats, the better the chance I may change my mind about him. It would be amazing if one year him, Blyleven & Kaat all get in.
I wish we'd make some moves already. Start answering questions... Although, I'm optimistic something will get done tomorrow or over the weekend.
It's still November. Don't hold your breath. I wouldn't expect Sabathia to sign anywhere for at least a couple more weeks. Does he have more than offers from just LA, Bos, and NYY yet? Burnett and Lowe won't sign until after Sabathia. There's no way they set the bar in this market. They'll wait until after Sabathia gets a Brinks truck, then pursue the "next best" offer. And if you're hoping for Teixeira, like I am, then I'd say start gathering supplies for a long winter. If we manage to convince him to come, it's going to be after he gets a number of counter-offers and we finally make an offer he can't refuse. You should think about it like this though: why rush it? If we signed Sabathia, Burnett, Lowe, Pettitte, Teixeira, and Abreu over the weekend, what would we talk about for the next 4 months? Now is the fun time, when we can speculate, argue, over and undervalue players, and actually talk about things. As soon as the roster is rounded out, it's time to count the days until pitchers and catchers report. There's only so many ways you can reconfigure the starting lineup and rotation in the meantime.
I use compiler for someone who was pretty/very good but not close to "great" who plays a long time and ends up with total counting stats close to what some of the greats have had. For example, Koufax doesn't have nearly the totals of Mussina, but was able to get in to the hall. If Mussina had the counting stats of Koufax, he wouldn't even be close to considered. Pedro Martinez will end up the same. He won't have the total numbers of Mussina, but is there any doubt as to who was the better pitcher?
Note on all the people saying 4 is crazy for Lowe but 6 is ok for Sabathia. sabathia is grossly overweight, which greatly increases his injury risk, where Lowe is a medical marvel, he's never been on the DL in his MLB career.... never, 4 years for lowe is reasonable, he is in great shape and his mechanics make elbow and shoulder injuries unlikely
As a curiosity question, how do you judge a pitcher, if not by his compiled stats then? Now, I've never been a stat-monger. I still don't truly understand OPS, ERA+, and a plethora of other statistical things. I get that certain numbers are better higher, and some lower, but in the end, it's all math to me. At the same time, you're one of the guys on here who is always quoting modern stats to support your arguments. So do stats matter, or perceived performance? I mean, Pedro had some pretty epic collapses against the Yankees. Something Moose didn't have. Had Moose pitched on the Sox or Yankees World Series teams, would he be somehow remembered better? Either stats matter, or they don't. You can't say on one hand that we should judge one player based on statistical evidence, and on the other that someone else should be judged differently. Now I personally don't know if Moose belongs in the Hall. I think he played his entire career on the fringe of greatness, but never got over the hump. Was that because of his own inability, or that of his teams'? The writers will decide that.
FTR, I like Lowe for 4 years. As for Sabathia, I would only want to give him 4, as I've said, but that won't get it done, and he's critical to the Yankees' success this winter.
It's not that I disregard compiled stats, I just weight them FAR less than I do rate stats. For example, K/9 is more important than total Ks. It's like a RB who carries the ball 35 times in a game and gains 150 yards vs a RB that has 15 carries for 100. Obviously the first guy gave you more yardage, but I think it's pretty clear that the second guy was more valuable. OPS is exactly what it says. On base plus slugging percentage. It measures in one easy stat both how often a guy is on base and his power. ERA+ is probably my favorite stat. It compares the pitcher's ERA to the ERA of the rest of the league at the time. If a guy is at 100 for ERA+, it means he's exactly league average. If he's at 95 or 105, then he is 5% worse or better than league average respectively. I think both matter, as far as HOF goes. First though, I don't buy the "you have to win a title" crap. That's a team thing, and there's only so much one player can do. That's for any sport. Stats are great to compare players, or to support what you think you see when they play. You may think for example that Derek Jeter has never mae an out in the 9th inning, but then when you look it up you can see that he's hitting .203 in the 9th or whatever it is. That is when stats are useful. Perception is different. Some things can't be measured through numbers. Pedro had one of the best runs of any pitcher of all time, and while the numbers bear that out, they don't tell the whole story. If you saw him on the mound in 1999, there was a feeling that he was unhittable every time out. Even if he gave up a couple runs in the first, there was the sense that that would be it. I think, as far as HOF goes, that things like that should play a huge role. Mussina was never a top 5 pitcher in his career. He might well have been somewhere from 6-10, but there was never a season where you would say in April that he was one of the elite in the game. That's where the stats come in. If he had gotten to 300, it puts a different angle on the argument IMO. Here's what I mean. He never got over the hump. To me, sticking around and pitching another 2-3 years at a high level and getting to 300 wins would put him over the hump. What I'm saying is, some players need the numbers. These are the, for lack of a better word, "fringe" guys that got in. Others can get in on the merits of their ability alone. These are the inner circle guys.
*shrug* I don't necessarily agree or disagree with anything you've said. I would definitely judge a guy based on his situation, rather than looking solely at stats. Honestly, I just wanted to see how you defended your position. I think your stance is fair enough. As far as Mussina, I'd give him my vote if I had one. The reason being, he compiled a pretty nice statistical career (though not elite) entirely in the AL East, entirely during the steroid era. EDIT: I still won't try to understand all those "other" stats. I understand ERA, RBI, HR, AVG, OBP. Everything else is too much math for me to worry about. (With apologies to statjeff.)
