YankeesRedSox.com

I expect more out of Neyer. He is one of the gang that says signing pitchers to long deals is a bad idea, yet he lumps all those pitchers in with the hitters in this piece. By his analysis, the hitters were fine, the pitchers a different story. I would draw a different conclusion and that's that the team who gives Santana the big deal should be careful.

Isn't it enough that you guys are the champs? You gotta caution us about A-Rod too? Ouch. I would be worried, except this isn't Texas, the Yankees will aquire whoever they want, their pitching has let them down in the playoffs more than A-rod has.

Peter, you mean when the Yankees give him a long term deal, right?

As for Neyer, I agree, this "study" was a bit lacking. You are right that his pitcher analysis (and many others) suggest long term deals for them is a bad idea. Other than the the Maddux deal in Neyer's article, name be a better long term deal for any pitcher. I have to say Pedro's deal was good, but I think it was, 6 years, $75mm. Can you think of others?

Also, the sample size is way too small. The best analysis would include all of Boras' deals over the past 10 years. I think just by virtue of the fact Boras seems to always get a ton of cash for his clients, the expectations are so high that they are seldom met. So it is natural to be disappointed in his clients vs. contracts.

Grant, just trying to stir the pot. Call me a bomb tosser if necessary.

You are right about ARod and the Yankees. The Yankees are just about guaranteed to have a better overall squad and they do have high priced talent already to help smooth out the financial differences.

The pitching was indeed the achilles heel last year. Imagine:

Santana
Wang
Joba
Kennedy
Mussina

(assuming Hughes gets moved). That is a better rotation than 2007, but it is still largely unproven at the 3-4 spots and Mussina has seen better days. If you can get Pettitte back too, that is something different. Moving Pettitte in and Mussina out would make me feel better if I were a Yankee fan (I just got dizzy at the thought).

I'm of the view that you win championships with 9 Joe Rudis or Roy Whites in the lineup and great pitching. Under this theory, the Yanks would be better off conserving resources to mount an offensive to sign Santana and Haren.

But, if you've got the money and have a chance to sign the best hitter in baseball, it's hard not to do it.

The harder question is do you unload Cano, Cabrera, Hughes, Chamberlain, and prospects to get Haren and Santana? I think Cano and Chamberlain should be untouchable. Everything else is up for grabs.

I am glad to see you are posting things you really believe in.

As for pitcher contracts, Randy Johnson's original deal with the Diamondbacks (5 years $55 million or so) would have to be considered a very good one. Maddux's original deal that brought him to the Braves (5 years/$28 million) was amazing.

So, based on this line of thinking, how do you like the Matsuzaka deal now?

I hear you Andy, it's a good question/topic of debate. I like that Rotation, I think the Yankees need Santana, I look at it like this, the Sox did whatever it took to get Beckett and Dice-K over the last few years, and it has paid off big time. Santana or possible Haren may be the only way to compete.

Peter, I'm not sure what your first part was supposed to mean (of your last comment). But as the the Matsuzaka deal, the contract is great: 6 years, $56mm Not bad in this day and age. And the Red Sox got 15 wins out of him. Not bad for a first year pitcher in the Majors who was plunked down in the AL East. I'm not naive enough to forget about the posting fee, which factored in, changes things.

That being said, the jury is out on the Matsuzaka deal, too early to tell.

Corey, getting Santana and Haren in exchange for Hughes, Cano, Joba and Cabrera would greatly alter the balance of power. Imagine two #1's at the top of the rotation and then a # 2 in wang followed by whoever else you get (Kennedy, Clippard or maybe Pettitte). I would think that two proven and relatively young starters like Haren and Santana would be a great swap. I know you weren't suggesting the Yankees get both, but I took that and ran with it.

Jack, I'm replying to your comment on a previous post here just to consolidate. Here is Jack's original comment: Actually, what I would REALLY prefer is to let the Yanks trade Hughes etc for Santana and have to spend the money for him to extend him. Then make a trade with Oakland (providing Billy B. is in yet another rebuilding mode) for Danny Haren who is signed for the next 3 years for $16M+ TOTAL. Say Crisp and Lester for Haren. I would definitely like that a whole lot better, especially if the Yanks have to give up Hughes etc for Johan and don't get Petite back. I just think Theo and the Sox have an obligation to look into a deal for Johan. Besides, I believe that a package of Ellsbury/Lester/Buccholtz (which I would not give btw) is quite a bit better than a package of Hughes/Cabrera/prospect and a package of Crisp/Lester/prospect or Crisp/Buccholtz/prospect just may be better as well. I cannot stand the fact the Yanks seem to think they can offer whatever they want for premimum talent and the other team should just say "ok" because they are after all, the Yankees. Let them have Johan, get on the phone to Oakland and bring Haren to Boston. I would love Beckett, Haren, Dice-K, Buccholtz, Schillie and Wake in the wings even more than having Johan, especially looking at the financial side of it; $16M+ for 3 FREAKIN' YEARS is way cheap for his kind of talent even tho Haren fell off drastically in the second half last year as did the whole Oakland team. Sox could probably change that 2nd half swoon with Farrell and a strong offense backing him up.
----
My reply.

Jack, I would go hard after Haren as the team that gets him doesn't deal with a no-trade and has him for relatively short money for 3 years! He is a very good pitcher, not Santana to be sure, but good. He'd look good in a Red Sox uni. But b/c he is so intriguing, Billy Beane is likely to capitalize on that and ask for a boat load.

I was referring to your comment that the "study was a bit lacking" and "the sample size was way too small".

As for Matsuzaka, my point was about the length of the deal in light of the article you posted which suggests that long term deals for pitchers are bad ideas.

Jack-

Where did the Yankees "think they can offer whatever they want for premium talent"? I don't think anyone has any clue other than a couple of people inside the organization what the Yankees may or may not have offered for Santana.

As for Haren, I think Andy is right. He is cheaper than Santana price-wise so I bet Beane uses that to get a huge package for him. And, I would keep an eye on the Mets in that negotiation because Billy Beane supposedly loves Lastings Milledge.

Andy and Peter, I realize Haren might cost more but given his talent and much cheaper bill and length of contract, I would consider giving more too. I think if you are Theo, you start with Coco and Lester and see what else you have to do. It may involve taking somebody from the A's and eating a bad contract. All things I would consider to get Haren if he were indeed available.

As for the "Yankees think they can offer whatever they want for premium talent" comment, it dates back to the Bobby Abreu trade, if you want to call it that. Also based upon reading several speculative Yanks fan blogs where the talk has been along the lines of "Yanks should be able to get Santana for Kennedy, a couple lesser pitching prospects and a minor league CF". I know they are just fan blogs but you cannot deny a Yankee sense of "I want it, therefore, I shall have it" at least among the fans, media, and prognosticators in NY. Sorry to rub you the wrong way but that Abreu trade was a sham salary dump and really sucked on the part of the Phils.

Jack-

Is it the Yankees fault that the Phillies accepted that trade? You can bash the Yankees for a ton of things, but the stupidity of other teams seems a stretch. Should we slam the Expos for getting so little for Pedro Martinez?

The blogs are a different story, but I would counter that almost every fan tends to overvalue their own prospects. I would challenge you to think about your offer of Crisp and Lester for Haren as an example.

Peter, point taken but in truth, I gave up Crisp/Lester as only a starting point in any deal for Haren. Plus, if latest news is to be believed, and by Andy's latest post it is circulating like wildfire, Lester/Crisp/prospects (Lowrie/Masterson?) may be enough to get the chance to pay Johan a ton of cash to play in Boston. No way to tell really but I guess we will see soon enough. As for Phillie stupidity, I live in Philly (for work only) and I am a lifelong Sox fan so seeing that deal up close and personal really hurt but you are right, the Phills got NOTHING for Bobby A. It was a great deal for the Yanks.

Jack-

I guess I don't see the attraction of Crisp. It is pretty obvious the Red Sox don't want him and he costs $5 million a year. For a team trying to control its payroll, there doesn't appear to me to be a lot of upside.

I imagine we will see a lot of these rumors over the next few days. I still don't buy that the Twins are going to pull the trigger and may just be leaking stories to see how much they can get.