Very good point. They don't even hit .280 mark on most teams. On that same note, how many teams can actually interchange their 8-9 hitters with thier 1-2? I have to admit, I love being the most fiscally irresponsible club in sports! :up:
I also think the Twins would be very interested in Cabrerra as they have to replace Hunter (who we could then sign). I'm with you Alio. I suppose Andruw Jones is there too. He had a bad year at the plate but when you talk about magic in center field..his picture is under the title. Better yet, trade Damon and Matsui and sign both of them and then trade for Santana too. So what if we have a 300 million dollar payroll for one year. It gets better in '09.
It depends how you look at the situation. The Yankees are not a "one player away" club. They could lose 2 or 3 quality ballplayers, and still be ahead of the game. That said, we Yankees fans know that certain pieces are required to field a championship caliber team. Good defensive outfielders don't exactly grow on trees. Melky happens to be a great defensive outfielder. For us, he's a premium item. Not to mention he sparks the clubhouse, and that matters. Wang is a quality pitcher. Is he an ace? The argument now is no. However, for two years straight he was in the Cy Young race until the end of the year. That's not too shabby. So then we look at Santana. On paper, that trade is a steal, if you take absolutely nothing else into account. Right now, there is absolutely no clear reason to pay anything for Santana. Look at the starting rotation for next year as it stands right now: Pettitte Wang Hughes Chamberlain Kennedy/Mussina When Pettitte's option year expires next October, suddenly Johan is a free agent. Some timing there, huh? Santana is a "nice to have" right now. But he's not a critical need. You don't trade two key players away, in addition to prospects, for a "nice to have".
The only problem with that is Boston will certainly try to get him if we don't. They are most likely dumping Schilling this year and will have a need even more so then we do. Wheter they still have the players to get him is another story. They gave up a lot for Gagne. Worst trade in history.
Well he did say with an extension so if any team can get him for that little and get him signed long term, it is a no brainer.
There are alot of question marks in that rotation after Pettite and Wang. Even Pettite is a question mark going into next year as he is getting older. You are counting on 3/5 of your rotation on kids that haven't proven they can get the job done full time, that is extremely risky for the Yanks. It isn't very realistic to have this conversation because that package wouldn't be nearly enough to get the Twins to listen, I just can't understand how any Yankee fan would say no to that. You can say that Santana isn't a neccesity but the Yanks might still be playing today if they had Santana pitching two games against Cleveland instead of Wang..
Actually, what he said is he would consider waiving his no trade clause if he gets an extension. He never said who he would consider waiving it for.
Older? He's going to be 35. The only reason there is any talk about him not coming back is because he is filthy rich and wants to spend quality time with his family.
Pettite had a great year this past year but he has had alot of arm troubles in the past and before this past year was thought to be breaking down. I wouldn't feel too comfortable with him being able to duplicate the year he just had. It is a fact that he is getting older..
Wow the Dodgers giving up alot to get Santana, Kershaw could be a huge start and Kemp has MVP type ability. I agree to an extent as yes they are going to have to give up alot but I don't think the Twins are not going to make a deal. I'd almost have to think a sign and trade is done though because most teams with a brain are going to give up huge prospects for a rental. I think there is a new way of business being done in baseball.
Whoa whoa whoa... wait a second. Are you trying to tell me that time's arrow doesn't reverse itself for Pettitte? I'm not buying it. I'll need to see some proof.
