big contracts to anybody over 28. I'm ready for some young guys playing hard and not getting hurt every other week. I could live with 75 and 87 if they started bring up some AAA guys.
Dump Teix, dump CC, dump ARod...Tired of IR squaters.
probably a year or two away, can be had for just money and at no obvious disadvantage to the Yankees (who are used to paying 150% of the contract price).
I don't want them to make a splash. If they're going to I'd prefer that it be Hanley because he can probably play a passable if below-average SS until a kid is ready and his bat is still a middle of the order caliber. But I'd prefer that they not make any splash, that if they do make decisions it be with a 2-3 year horizon.
surprised to see the Yankees go under 189 with them trading Gardner.
How is trading Gardner getting them under 189? He's too good defensively and one of the few competent and consistent players on the team at a reasonable price.
surprised to see the Yankees go under 189 with them trading Gardner.
That's not going to happen, because when you factor in the AAV of A-Rod's deal (subject to after the fact increases as he hits HR milestones) and the arb numbers and the $11 mil in benefits you're already in excess of $189. You sign a major league veteran to any sort of deal you're over it. Any savings from dealing Gardner is offset by the cost of even a below average shortstop.
surprised to see the Yankees go under 189 with them trading Gardner.
Remember, they're adding A-Rod's $22 million back to the payroll. They have 12 players under contract right now that bring them to $174+ million.
They can't sign anyone, not mccarthy, not headley, not robertson, not anyone if they want to be under 189. I just don't see it.
They're adding A-Rod's $27.5 mil AAV to the luxury tax consideration, even if his salary is just $22. And I think his next bonus is just 6 HRs away, which would kick his AAV up by another half mil.
for sure how MLB is going to account for the 23 million the Yankees didn't pay Arod last year? So instead of 27.5 he is 25.2 AAV? I doubt the Yankees give Arod the chance to hit a sixth home run next year...he'll just occupy a seat on the bench if there isn't some kind of settlement.
Trading Gardner frees up 12.5 and dumping Kelley saves more money. For the Yankees to get under they would need to have a bunch of minimal earning players on the team next year...could they do that? Of a 12 man pitching staff 9 could make near the minimum plus Nova when he comes back. The entire pen could make near the minimum. The the 4th and 5th starters could as well to start the year. Second base could be the minimum. Left field isn't going to be expensive with Gardner gone with maybe a platoon of Young and Flores. They would need to trade for a young SS. I like trading Gardner in a deal for Brad Miller of Seattle. The M's badly need a lead off hitter as their 1 hole batters scored the fewest runs in the AL at just 71.
The only reason I believe the Yankees will choose to do this is there are too many IF players. If Tanaka will be healthy...if CC can make a go of it...if Pineda can give a full year...if if if if if there are to many to be confident about competing. What happens if they go for the 189 and find themselves in contention? They could blow that up at the trade deadline and go for it!
they would've done it last year, when A-Rod's contract didn't count, and before handing out 20+ mil contracts to two players.
I'm not saying I wouldn't mind seeing it, don't get me wrong, but half of their roster won't be on minimum contracts, specifically, a year after unnecessarily signing up Ellsbury longterm.
and you're making good points, but that's not the way the Yankees do business. If there aren't consequential baseball games being played at least into early September their attendance will plunge, because frankly nobody is going to show up to watch Hiroki Kuroda's farewell tour (were that to happen). They'd rather have a fighting chance at the playoffs (and the division still doesn't have a clear favorite - the O's are going to lose Nelson Cruz and whatever horseshoe Steve Pearce was injecting and the Blue Jays will find a way to underwhelm) than blow it all up in the hopes that in two or three years they'll again be competitive. They view Gardner as a part of whatever they're building, and if and when they deal him it'll probably be for a finishing touch (plus his deal is reasonably team-friendly).
how MLB be is going to account for the Arod savings? I have never read how that actually gets accounted for. The Yankees went for it last year once they knew it was Jeter's last season. As for this year I think they can do the 189 if they want too...it's going to be interesting to see what happens.
I don't care either way but I would love to see a bunch of younger players playing more...It would surely test Girardi's manageability skills...personally I thinks he sucks as an in game manager and will be terribly exposed he the Yankees go for the 189.
how MLB be is going to account for the Arod savings? I have never read how that actually gets accounted for. The Yankees went for it last year once they knew it was Jeter's last season. As for this year I think they can do the 189 if they want too...it's going to be interesting to see what happens.
I don't care either way but I would love to see a bunch of younger players playing more...It would surely test Girardi's manageability skills...personally I thinks he sucks as an in game manager and will be terribly exposed he the Yankees go for the 189.
I'm almost certain they're going by the AAV of the contract as signed, treating last year as anomalous. Otherwise they would have counted his AAV last year at the depressed value.
surprised to see the Yankees go under 189 with them trading Gardner.
How is trading Gardner getting them under 189? He's too good defensively and one of the few competent and consistent players on the team at a reasonable price.
I agree. I never understood how fans want to get rid of Gardner. He's a good player with a team friendly contract considering what Ellsbury is being paid.
You do know that Girardi won manager of the year with the Marlins in Â
MLB account for things and neither does Joel Sherman or anyone here as well. We all are guessing I think just looking at Cot's that if they go with minimal earning players and turn Garder into a young SS they may have a chance at 189 this year.
As for the Yankees doing this or not doing this...the old Yankees under the Boss would never do this but now they are the Hal Yankees...he wants to be under 189.
whether or not Girardi is a good manager...I think he stinks when it comes to in game management and that is what I as a fan look at.
I posed a thought that with all the WHAT IF surrounding next years team that they might want to go the 189 route.
As for Gardner I like and have followed him all through the minors seeing him play in Trenton multiple times. If he can be turned into a young SS like Brad Miller I would do it.
I hated the Ellsbury deal the minute it was announced Â
MLB account for things and neither does Joel Sherman or anyone here as well. We all are guessing I think just looking at Cot's that if they go with minimal earning players and turn Garder into a young SS they may have a chance at 189 this year.
As for the Yankees doing this or not doing this...the old Yankees under the Boss would never do this but now they are the Hal Yankees...he wants to be under 189.
Hal wanted to be under $189 until he realized a. Boston just won the ----ing World Series, and he could not stand for that and b. the price of getting under $189 was going to be getting under 3 million paying customers, and that the financial savings might be a wash.
themselves realize there are to many WHAT IF to really be assured of playing consequential games come September. They are a middle team right now an it is very difficult to buy your way back up stream a become a top team so to me the smart plan is become a bad team and go young.
themselves realize there are to many WHAT IF to really be assured of playing consequential games come September. They are a middle team right now an it is very difficult to buy your way back up stream a become a top team so to me the smart plan is become a bad team and go young.
But in football if you're a bad team, you could draft a QB would could be responsible for a 3-4 win turnaround almost immediately. In basketball and even hockey it could be immediate or close to it, at least at the top of the draft. In baseball a high schooler is going to take a minimum 3-4 years to get through the system, a collegian a minimum of 1-2, and most pro prospects have a learning curve the first year or two in the bigs. The Yankees that Jeter joined were already a good team, even though they weren't the year prior to his drafting. So even if you get a top 5 pick (no guarantee, because there are rosters a lot shittier than the Yankees) you still have to wait several years for that pick to matter, and even then the bust factor can be very high. A stray year of suckitude here and there can have a positive impact in the long run and of course giving the kids a shot can help to develop long-term starters but sucking to get good is a 3-4 year strategy.
themselves realize there are to many WHAT IF to really be assured of playing consequential games come September. They are a middle team right now an it is very difficult to buy your way back up stream a become a top team so to me the smart plan is become a bad team and go young.
That is just not happening as was stated above. If they are irrelevant in Sept or earlier, nobody is going to shell out a few hundred to see a 20 game under .500 team. They are damned if they do and damned if they don't.
It was stupid to pay Ellsbury double Gardner when they are basically the same player - Ellsbury a bit more power, Gardner a bit better OF (Ellsbury much better bsae runner). Yet, they were the best two everyday players on the team last year.
Guessing this also raises the price on what they'd want to deal Ramirez.
It seems like one of the next big dominoes in FA is Sandoval, and I'd imagine the Mets will be testing the waters re: Murphy with whichever team doesn't get him. I think it's 50-50 they trade him, but they're definitely going to shop him and that seems like the next thing that will come up (unless a team reverses course on Niese/Gee/Colon unexpectedly).
Guessing this also raises the price on what they'd want to deal Ramirez.
It seems like one of the next big dominoes in FA is Sandoval, and I'd imagine the Mets will be testing the waters re: Murphy with whichever team doesn't get him. I think it's 50-50 they trade him, but they're definitely going to shop him and that seems like the next thing that will come up (unless a team reverses course on Niese/Gee/Colon unexpectedly).
I get the feeling they will only deal Ramirez if blown away. He's so cheap and top 8-10 at the position. They have nobody else to replace him and adding LaRoche seems to imply they think they can compete right away. I think they are in a similar situation as the Mets to be honest with you.
I agree - he's their Murphy, except he's more valuable since he's a SS Â
has 2 years remaining and they don't have the in-house replacement options.
Sandy is so methodical and risk averse I'd be shocked if he makes any move before the new year other than trading Murphy. And if he trades Murphy I'd bet a big part of why is budgetary. We know the pitchers aren't in high demand and also know he's not likely to budge off his stance of waiting for the SS market to come to him. Seems the worst case scenario there would be signing 1 of Drew/Lowrie/Cabrera in January, likely to a 1 year deal.
In fact, if I were predicting the rest of the offseason that would be it. Murphy traded at Winter Meetings. SS acquired in January (Flores likely goes to 2B). 1 of Niese/Gee/Colon moved in January as well. They add another hitter off the bench and BP arm along the way.
On @JonHeymanCBS report: No agreement this afternoon, but Red Sox deal w/Hanley Ramirez ‘could come together quickly’ http://fullcount.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/red-sox/2014/11/23/source-red-sox-deal-for-hanley-ramirez-could-come-together-quickly/ …
They don't have to throw in money necessarily. Easier to sell it publicly if they bring back an expensive arm/OF in return and a B prospect of two.
It would be tough to deal Andrus without eating $, even if they took on a Swisher or Grandy type contract. It's the length of it that makes the difference, the notion that eight years from now you'll likely STILL have an overpaid SS on your roster. Even for teams like the Yankees that's a big deal.
If the mets get "stuck" with him, I'd consider this a very successful offseason. I know I'm in the mo Keith in that opinion, so not looking to debate Andrus as a player.
I just don't see any chance the Mets acquire Andrus. Â
that the Sox may be pursuing Ramirez in lieu of Pablo, perhaps an admission he is going to ink with the Padres or the Giants.
I understand there are deals to be made, but if they sign Hanley as an OF they've got Cespedes, Castillo, Betts, Holt, Nava and Victorino for a max of four spots.
definitely LF if Sandoval is signed, that way he can spend half the year sheltered by the monster. His agent indicated he was open to moving to either corner in both the IF and OF, obviously RF is never going to happen and 1B is occupied.
Dump Teix, dump CC, dump ARod...Tired of IR squaters.
I don't want them to make a splash. If they're going to I'd prefer that it be Hanley because he can probably play a passable if below-average SS until a kid is ready and his bat is still a middle of the order caliber. But I'd prefer that they not make any splash, that if they do make decisions it be with a 2-3 year horizon.
Remember, they're adding A-Rod's $22 million back to the payroll. They have 12 players under contract right now that bring them to $174+ million.
They can't sign anyone, not mccarthy, not headley, not robertson, not anyone if they want to be under 189. I just don't see it.
How is trading Gardner getting them under 189? He's too good defensively and one of the few competent and consistent players on the team at a reasonable price.
That's not going to happen, because when you factor in the AAV of A-Rod's deal (subject to after the fact increases as he hits HR milestones) and the arb numbers and the $11 mil in benefits you're already in excess of $189. You sign a major league veteran to any sort of deal you're over it. Any savings from dealing Gardner is offset by the cost of even a below average shortstop.
Quote:
surprised to see the Yankees go under 189 with them trading Gardner.
Remember, they're adding A-Rod's $22 million back to the payroll. They have 12 players under contract right now that bring them to $174+ million.
They can't sign anyone, not mccarthy, not headley, not robertson, not anyone if they want to be under 189. I just don't see it.
They're adding A-Rod's $27.5 mil AAV to the luxury tax consideration, even if his salary is just $22. And I think his next bonus is just 6 HRs away, which would kick his AAV up by another half mil.
Trading Gardner frees up 12.5 and dumping Kelley saves more money. For the Yankees to get under they would need to have a bunch of minimal earning players on the team next year...could they do that? Of a 12 man pitching staff 9 could make near the minimum plus Nova when he comes back. The entire pen could make near the minimum. The the 4th and 5th starters could as well to start the year. Second base could be the minimum. Left field isn't going to be expensive with Gardner gone with maybe a platoon of Young and Flores. They would need to trade for a young SS. I like trading Gardner in a deal for Brad Miller of Seattle. The M's badly need a lead off hitter as their 1 hole batters scored the fewest runs in the AL at just 71.
The only reason I believe the Yankees will choose to do this is there are too many IF players. If Tanaka will be healthy...if CC can make a go of it...if Pineda can give a full year...if if if if if there are to many to be confident about competing. What happens if they go for the 189 and find themselves in contention? They could blow that up at the trade deadline and go for it!
I'm not saying I wouldn't mind seeing it, don't get me wrong, but half of their roster won't be on minimum contracts, specifically, a year after unnecessarily signing up Ellsbury longterm.
I don't care either way but I would love to see a bunch of younger players playing more...It would surely test Girardi's manageability skills...personally I thinks he sucks as an in game manager and will be terribly exposed he the Yankees go for the 189.
I don't care either way but I would love to see a bunch of younger players playing more...It would surely test Girardi's manageability skills...personally I thinks he sucks as an in game manager and will be terribly exposed he the Yankees go for the 189.
I'm almost certain they're going by the AAV of the contract as signed, treating last year as anomalous. Otherwise they would have counted his AAV last year at the depressed value.
Quote:
surprised to see the Yankees go under 189 with them trading Gardner.
How is trading Gardner getting them under 189? He's too good defensively and one of the few competent and consistent players on the team at a reasonable price.
I agree. I never understood how fans want to get rid of Gardner. He's a good player with a team friendly contract considering what Ellsbury is being paid.
That team probably had more talent than this Yankee team will have, unless you get 30+ starts out of Tanaka.
As for the Yankees doing this or not doing this...the old Yankees under the Boss would never do this but now they are the Hal Yankees...he wants to be under 189.
I posed a thought that with all the WHAT IF surrounding next years team that they might want to go the 189 route.
As for Gardner I like and have followed him all through the minors seeing him play in Trenton multiple times. If he can be turned into a young SS like Brad Miller I would do it.
As for the Yankees doing this or not doing this...the old Yankees under the Boss would never do this but now they are the Hal Yankees...he wants to be under 189.
Hal wanted to be under $189 until he realized a. Boston just won the ----ing World Series, and he could not stand for that and b. the price of getting under $189 was going to be getting under 3 million paying customers, and that the financial savings might be a wash.
But in football if you're a bad team, you could draft a QB would could be responsible for a 3-4 win turnaround almost immediately. In basketball and even hockey it could be immediate or close to it, at least at the top of the draft. In baseball a high schooler is going to take a minimum 3-4 years to get through the system, a collegian a minimum of 1-2, and most pro prospects have a learning curve the first year or two in the bigs. The Yankees that Jeter joined were already a good team, even though they weren't the year prior to his drafting. So even if you get a top 5 pick (no guarantee, because there are rosters a lot shittier than the Yankees) you still have to wait several years for that pick to matter, and even then the bust factor can be very high. A stray year of suckitude here and there can have a positive impact in the long run and of course giving the kids a shot can help to develop long-term starters but sucking to get good is a 3-4 year strategy.
That is just not happening as was stated above. If they are irrelevant in Sept or earlier, nobody is going to shell out a few hundred to see a 20 game under .500 team. They are damned if they do and damned if they don't.
It was stupid to pay Ellsbury double Gardner when they are basically the same player - Ellsbury a bit more power, Gardner a bit better OF (Ellsbury much better bsae runner). Yet, they were the best two everyday players on the team last year.
BREAKING: The Chicago #WhiteSox have signed 1B Adam LaRoche to a 2 year, $25 million contract. Per @BNightengale
It seems like one of the next big dominoes in FA is Sandoval, and I'd imagine the Mets will be testing the waters re: Murphy with whichever team doesn't get him. I think it's 50-50 they trade him, but they're definitely going to shop him and that seems like the next thing that will come up (unless a team reverses course on Niese/Gee/Colon unexpectedly).
It seems like one of the next big dominoes in FA is Sandoval, and I'd imagine the Mets will be testing the waters re: Murphy with whichever team doesn't get him. I think it's 50-50 they trade him, but they're definitely going to shop him and that seems like the next thing that will come up (unless a team reverses course on Niese/Gee/Colon unexpectedly).
I get the feeling they will only deal Ramirez if blown away. He's so cheap and top 8-10 at the position. They have nobody else to replace him and adding LaRoche seems to imply they think they can compete right away. I think they are in a similar situation as the Mets to be honest with you.
Sandy is so methodical and risk averse I'd be shocked if he makes any move before the new year other than trading Murphy. And if he trades Murphy I'd bet a big part of why is budgetary. We know the pitchers aren't in high demand and also know he's not likely to budge off his stance of waiting for the SS market to come to him. Seems the worst case scenario there would be signing 1 of Drew/Lowrie/Cabrera in January, likely to a 1 year deal.
In fact, if I were predicting the rest of the offseason that would be it. Murphy traded at Winter Meetings. SS acquired in January (Flores likely goes to 2B). 1 of Niese/Gee/Colon moved in January as well. They add another hitter off the bench and BP arm along the way.
The #RedSox have offered Pablo Sandoval a five-year, $95 million contract, according to @nickcafardo. Could make them the favorites.
A source tells me the #Athletics have acquired Ike Davis from the #Pirates for international slot money. It's strictly a move for depth.
Link - ( New Window )
Supposedly they want to keep Andrus, and think he'll have a rebound year.
Besides, if the Mets were wiling to take Andrus' contract, it would make infinitely more sense to sign Moncada.
On @JonHeymanCBS report: No agreement this afternoon, but Red Sox deal w/Hanley Ramirez ‘could come together quickly’ http://fullcount.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/red-sox/2014/11/23/source-red-sox-deal-for-hanley-ramirez-could-come-together-quickly/ …
Besides, if the Mets were wiling to take Andrus' contract, it would make infinitely more sense to sign Moncada.
I agree - don't see Andrus interesting the Mets (unless Tex is throwing in a boatload of $).
It would be tough to deal Andrus without eating $, even if they took on a Swisher or Grandy type contract. It's the length of it that makes the difference, the notion that eight years from now you'll likely STILL have an overpaid SS on your roster. Even for teams like the Yankees that's a big deal.
I understand there are deals to be made, but if they sign Hanley as an OF they've got Cespedes, Castillo, Betts, Holt, Nava and Victorino for a max of four spots.