Q & A and direct from Baseball America.

Page 1 of 4 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Go down

Q & A and direct from Baseball America.

Post  RedMagma on Tue Jan 08, 2008 8:36 am

Some explainatiions can be found here in the Q & A. Again this is only part of the Q & A and direct from Baseball America.


http://yanksfansoxfan.typepad.com/ysfs/2008/01/new-york-yankee.html#comments


Q: Hi John How is it possible that Ross Ohlendorf and Jeff Marquez are more highly regarded than Dellin Betances and Jairo Heredia? The Top 10 really surprised me.

A: John Manuel: Steven, read the report on Ohlendorf—he's got 2 pitches that graded as 60s or 70s as a reliever, his stuff really jumped up, and that was not from the Yankees, that info was from scouts with other orgs. He's ready to set up in '08, so closeness to the majors had something to do with it. Same with Marquez—he had a good year in Double-A and seems ready to be a big league starter in 2009. Betances and Heredia are high-ceiling RHPs who have yet to pitch 100 pro innings, and while Heredia has some polish and could move quickly, his stuff is good, not great. Ranking players is always going to be inexact and marrying ceiling with likelihood to reach it is difficult, so in those cases I went for the guys who have talent but also have proved it at higher levels.

Q: If Melky Cabrera is traded, do the Yankees have any minor leaguers ready to take over center field or do they have to settle for Damon returning to that position?

A: John Manuel: Um, that's why we ranked Austin Jackson second and also Brett Gardner in the top 10 (guess I ranked him 8th). Gardner's closer, Jackson has the higher ceiling, both can play CF better than Damon right now.

Q: Let me guess the 11-15(not in order): Frank Cervelli, Mark Melancon, Dan McCutchen, Humberto Sanchez, Dellin Betances. How correct am I?

A: John Manuel: You nailed it except for Cervelli, the scouts outside the org that I talked to were not sanguine on his ability as a hitter and forecast him as a backup C in the Jose Molina mode (maybe a good bit better than that offensively), rather than as a regular.

Q: If they're both stricly relievers, who's better Ross Ohlendorf or Justin Masterson?

A: John Manuel: Ohlendorf's stuff is a grade or two better, as Masterson doesn't have a plus secondary pitch. However, Masterson has much, much better command. Would you rather have Timlin or Jeff Nelson? That's the question, not one someone in a Yankees chat will likely answer dispassionately. I actually think Masterson will be a starter, just not in Boston, so I'd give him the edge as a pitching prospect, and I'd take him as a reliever because relief pitching is less about stuff and more about throwing strikes, for me.

Q: It seems to me brett gardener would fit the yankee lineup perfectly as a bottom of the order hitter. I feel like brett gets hated on for his lack of power but he is what he is, no one ever expected him to hit 15+ homers. Seems like the big league club could use more brett gardeners. Thoughts?

A: John Manuel: Gardner would have to beat out Melky Cabrera but I think I like Gardner's ceiling better. I haven't seen Cabrera ever touted as a guy who would develop power and he has yet to slug over .400 in two big league seasons; it was a .432 slugging percentage in the minors, pretty similar if I recall to Jacoby Ellsbury, only he's not the defender Ellsbury is, nor the basestealer. Melky brings energy but to me, Gardner's ceiling is higher and he's also an energy guy. So I'm with you, as long as Gardner hits with enough authority to keep pitchers honest. If he doesn't, then he's Jason Tyner.

Q: Edwar Ramirez in the Yanks top 15? What is a reasonable projection for him in '08? He wasn't very good with the Yankees, but you can't argue with his MILB stats.

A: John Manuel: In the 30, not top 15, the minor numbers are great, he has one 80 pitch, and then the fastball's fringy and nothing else is even that good. I think he's a sixth- or seventh-inning reliever, not a guy who is an integral part of a big league championship roster. Hope I'm wrong; it's a great story. I saw him pitch extremely well in person and his changeup was ridiculous, but the lack of life on his fastball concerned the scouts I talked to.

Q: How does the Yankees' top 10 stack up against Boston ?

A: John Manuel: I've ranked the Yanks system for three or four books now and this is the best shape the system has been in in that span. The same is true for Boston, however. I'd take Joba over Clay Buchholz, though Jim Callis would not. I'm with Jim in that I really think highly of Ellsbury, Anderson, Masterson, Lowrie . . . I think Boston's top 10 is safer than New York's and Boston has more big bats and more strength in the infield (just by having Lowrie, who I like). New York has more pitching depth but less variety; I like Boston's top 10 by a hair and Boston's system by a little bit just because it has more hitters who have a chance to be big league regulars.


RedMagma

Posts : 3654
Join date : 2007-12-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Q & A and direct from Baseball America.

Post  RedMagma on Tue Jan 08, 2008 8:37 am

The whole 'untouchable' business has to be taken in context. Guys like Jackson, Tabata, Kennedy, Horne are untouchable as long as Hughes, a huge value (and one I wouldn't trade for one of the entire Red Sox packages), is in the picture. If two of them could be in the place of Hughes, I am sure Cashman would be greatly amenable to that.



Furthermore, untouchable needs to be in the context of for what player. These guys (and combinations of them) are untouchable for Santana given his unique demands for a contract etc. For example, Im sure if there were a comparable pitcher locked up for a good contract long term, less players would be "untouchable"

RedMagma

Posts : 3654
Join date : 2007-12-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Q & A and direct from Baseball America.

Post  RedMagma on Tue Jan 08, 2008 8:40 am

If they lose Kennedy and Hughes in the same deal I think they would want to replenish some arms.

Not necessarily, and they sure as hell wouldn't be looking to replenish the farm w/ arms like Ward and Waldrop i.e. back-end starters/mid-relievers. Yanks have plenty of pitching in the farm, there's no need for more.

I think Hank Steinbrenner would deal Hughes, Cabrera, and Kennedy but I think Cashman wants to preserve the young talent. The Twins need Major league ready talent the Yankees have plenty of that.

Why not package a solid lower A pitching prospect like Zack Ward or Kyle Waldrop with Santana to ease their pain and help us get the players we need to compete in 2008.

For example Johan Santana and Kyle Waldrop

for

Hughes, Cabrera, and Kennedy. We could sacrifice one good player down the ladder to get this deal done.

or

Hughes, Cabrera and Kennedy

for Santana and Denard Span (won't need him anyway)

Just one problem: Yanks have no interest in Ward/Waldrop since they've plenty of pitching in the farm, especially right-handed pitching.


Tom Power needs to start watching baseball games after this little gem. Coco is mediocre on offense but he should have won the GG for defense this year. He was absolutely spectacular in CF this year. You would be getting a top 3 defensive CF in Coco. The bat is another story. He has been bad the last two years in Boston was was very good the two years before that in Cleveland (where his defense wasn't all that great).

He won't comment on any specific trade talks, but the consensus appears to be that the Red Sox remain the front-runners. Unfortunately, every time I hear names being tossed around, Coco Crisp's is among them. No thanks. The team needs a better glove than that in center field.

RedMagma

Posts : 3654
Join date : 2007-12-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Q & A and direct from Baseball America.

Post  RedMagma on Tue Jan 08, 2008 8:41 am

Nespn- Jemele Hill says- We're not buying it, Roger

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=hill/080107&sportCat=mlb


You didn't believe that, did you?

Fraud-ger Clemens was about as believable as Michael Corleone when he tried to convince Kay he didn't kill Carlo.

Clemens did nothing to exonerate himself in his "60 Minutes" interview with Mike Wallace that aired Sunday night or in his overly defensive news conference Monday.


If this is all a lie, Roger Clemens risks a level of outrage, retribution and disgust that would put him in some pretty infamous company.
Anyone who has ever cheated in a relationship knows the best way to hide cheating is out in the open. That seems to be the defense Clemens is running.

Fraud-ger is acting like a man who is falsely accused. Key word here: acting. He is outraged (a month later) about being connected to performance-enhancing drugs through his former trainer, Brian McNamee, who told the feds and former Sen. George Mitchell he injected Clemens between 16 and 21 times with human growth hormone and steroids.

Now, Clemens is willing to tell his side (although he could have done that when Mitchell first approached) and he has filed a defamation suit against McNamee. He even came to his news conference with a trump card, playing a taped conversation for the media between him and McNamee.

Ultimately, that phone call and everything Clemens has done the last two days has been pointless. That phone call proved nothing, but added to the growing list of doubts about Clemens' innocence.

You'd think if a guy was trying to ruin your livelihood, Fraud-ger would have dropped a couple choice four- and 10-letter cuss words on him, or simply never have taken the call. You would think, at some point, Fraud-ger would have implored McNamee to tell the truth and wouldn't have given a care if McNamee's son was sick. Instead, Fraud-ger acted as if McNamee had borrowed a DVD and didn't return it.

So we are left with an act that is officially long past tiresome. See Fraud-ger's interview and ensuing news conference for what it was: compelling, but not very informative. He said little we hadn't already heard. All Clemens did was supply measurements -- as in exactly how much rope Clemens was going to use to hang himself.

But honestly, given what Fraud-ger stands to lose if McNamee's allegations are somehow proven true beyond its he-said-he-said nature, you can't blame Clemens for the all-out assault. Clemens' legacy and reputation are not only in jeopardy, but possibly completely unredeemable. This is a man who has peddled his values just as much as his fastball.

No one should have expected Fraud-ger to tear open his guts and tearfully admit that what McNamee said was true -- that Clemens had taken injections of steroids and human growth hormone to maintain his career.

Telling the truth never has been an option for Fraud-ger, given what he loses if McNamee's allegations are somehow proven true beyond their he-said-he-said nature. This is a man who has built his livelihood on not only being a dominant pitcher, but a good guy, a tough guy and a real American. He has sold his values just as much as his fastball.

If this is all a lie, Fraud-ger risks a level of outrage, retribution and disgust that would put him in some pretty infamous company. Many Americans want to believe Fraud-ger didn't do it. Unfortunately, he isn't giving them much to work with, alternately presenting doubt and hope.

I hope Fraud-ger understands his tirades not only have questioned McNamee's credibility, but the federal government's. He's inviting them to come after him. And if there is anything we've learned from the cases against Barry Bonds, Michael Vick and, heck, even Martha Stewart, the feds are more than willing to make an example out of those who mock them.

For the most part, Clemens has defended himself in such a baffling manner, it's difficult not to view this as an elaborate con.

Clemens told Wallace -- and Clemens' attorney Rusty Hardin reiterated this in the news conference -- that he wasn't sure taking a lie detector test would help. Funny, I thought the entire point of the test was to prove if someone is telling the truth. Unless Fraud-ger is Jason Bourne, why wouldn't people buy those results? Instead of giving himself another avenue of truth, Clemens seemed to be giving himself an out for either not taking the test or failing it.

Perhaps the most comical part of the interview with Wallace was when Clemens tried to argue that taking steroids and HGH would never have been beneficial to his career. So, Fraud-ger, you mean Jose Canseco, Rafael Palmeiro, Barry Bonds and the litany of other athletes who have been connected to performance-enhancing drugs are allegedly endangering their reputations for a product that doesn't pay off? HGH, which many doctors claim is akin to a fountain of youth, is reportedly being bought on the black market by at least dozens of athletes because it doesn't do anything?

Clemens says he couldn't have possibly been taking PEDs because his "tendons didn't turn to dust."

"If he's doing that to me, I should have a third ear coming out of my forehead," Clemens told Wallace. "I should be pulling tractors with my teeth."

Either Clemens thinks we're all stupid, or he's forgotten the information we've learned about steroids and HGH in the wake of so many athletes using those drugs. We are a far cry from the days of Lyle Alzado, who died from a brain tumor, though some (including Alzado himself) believe it was connected to his admitted steroid abuse. The BALCO scandal showed that athletes are able to operate quite comfortably on a carefully monitored drug cocktail. Besides, most of the baseball players caught with PEDs have been pitchers, and none of them had an extra ear or were dragging John Deeres.

Clemens reiterated Monday he didn't know Andy Pettitte took HGH, but that hardly passes the smell test. Your best friend, who used the same trainer as you, who worked out with you on a regular basis, took HGH and you had no idea?

Fraud-ger is in full blustering and hustling mode, but there is so much we don't know. Fact is, Fraud-ger has no credible answers for why, McNamee, a former police officer who we learn from the phone call clearly idolizes Clemens, would tell the truth about Pettitte, but lie about Clemens? Of all the hindparts to stick a needle in, why would McNamee point out Clemens'? What would he have to gain by fingering a man many consider to be the best pitcher ever?

Fraud-ger has no rational explanation for not talking to Mitchell when he had the chance. Fraud-ger claimed he had no idea he would be named in the report -- which is hard to believe since his name was previously connected in a newspaper report to the Jason Grimsley affidavit, albeit erroneously. Wouldn't you want to talk to Mitchell to clear up any possible misconceptions?

Brilliant of Clemens to turn the allegations against him into a sob story, telling Wallace he chewed the painkiller Vioxx "like Skittles," to help his team. Telling those at the news conference that he only reached out to McNamee because of his sick son. When he talked to Wallace, he also resorted to using one of the most over-used clichés because, frankly, Fraud-ger is in a bad spot.

"I don't know if I can defend myself," Clemens said. "I think people -- a lot of people have already made their decisions. And that's our country, isn't it? Guilty before innocence -- that's the way our country works now."

By the way, this is the same country that has made Clemens millions.

At this point, all we can expect from Fraud-ger are well-constructed lies disguised as genuine outrage. It's not like we haven't seen this before. Marion Jones held a teary-eyed news conference proclaiming her innocence, threatened to sue BALCO mastermind Victor Conte and even lied in her own autobiography before she finally admitted she took performance-enhancing drugs. Pete Rose maintained his charade for years before finally admitting he bet on his own team.

One thing Clemens said definitely was true. He said the Hall of Fame is the least of his concerns. He's right. He's playing a dangerous game of chicken. We'll see if he's bluffing.

Page 2 columnist Jemele Hill can be reached at jemeleespn@gmail.com.

RedMagma

Posts : 3654
Join date : 2007-12-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Q & A and direct from Baseball America.

Post  RedMagma on Tue Jan 08, 2008 8:45 am

Decent article, but all of this Fraud-ger nonsense needs to stop. It was clever the first time, but got stale fast.

As much as I think Clemens is a mercenary in the truest sense, he is right about the court of public opinion. It really is guilty until proven innocent anymore. With all of the negative actions happening in sports over the past couple of years, how could it not be?

I'm not saying it's fair, but it's just the way things are now. You have to prove your innocence to keep your reputation in tact. Roger didn't do that AT ALL with his press conference, phone call, and 60 Minutes interview. He just left us with more questions.

If he did it, he did it. Fess up and deal with the consequences like a man. If he didn't do it, then show me proof. It's that simple.


It is always a great article when "hindparts" and "fingering" are found in back to back sentences.

Je-Smelly Hill stinks. What a blatant racist this writer is.

Jemele Hill is an idiot with an agenda

Well no matter how this turns out is a lose lose for Rodger. If he came out and just admitted he took performance enhancing drugs he is hosed but maybe he will get some sympathy for admitting to the truth from the start. He instead is trying to lie his way out of it and he is making an already terrible situation even more hopless as time wears on. I wonder what his son must think of him? Now he has cast a shadow on his son who is trying to make to the big leagues. There will always be a spectre of doubt that his kid is clean if he makes the bigs and starts winning.

So Fraudger is not right on but everyone was mute when Bonds was castrated with the same evidence or less (Bongs trainer was no RAT) like Mcnamee.. BUT Mcnamee's testimony to the FEDs is hearsay according to Bob Costas.. I shot Clemens in the #### with specific dates and cycle periods is hearsay?? but Jemele hill is a fat racist broad?? And the Majority of the press and i refrain from using "white press" that gave Clemens and still giving Clemens a pass is WHAT??
Hug Clemens NUTS all you want but know this .. his lying rich, lard a**, arrogant, roided up, abscess riddled buttocks does not give a darn if you defend him all day long.. he is a rich SOB as Bonds and even in the face of mounting evidence will lie to his grave.. nothing wrong with lying.. just don't sell us a bunch of BS (Tapes, Yes and No to Lie Detector, Brian Mcnamee did not inject me with anything.. Brian Mcnamee did inject me with Lido and B12... yada..yada..yada..ho rse manure..cow dung..


Talk about a racist, back up bonds but bash white clemens. You are a fraud Jemele.

I believe that probably over 90% of posters here are white. And my guess is, on all the clemens threads, that a HUGE majority 90+% think he is guilty as hell.
People seem to have a problem with miss Hill because of her stances, on similiar accusations ...where she vehemently defends Bonds but not Clemens.

It is funny how Hill states that McNamee was a former police officer to help bolster his credibility. How about the part that he was wrapped up in a rape case, and had to meet with Mitchell to avoid going to jail for steriod distribution? Yeah that is a real credible witness. Personnally I don't know what to believe in this thing, but I do think everyone who is proclaiming Clemens guilty based solely on the word of another person should think back to the false allegations in the Duke lacross case. We all know how that turned out. All that being said, I wish Roger would just do the lie detector test. That would be good enough for me. Without being specialy trained, it is very difficult to beat one. The fact that Roger is reluctant to take the lie detector to me really hurts his credibility.

what would jamile know? shes so fat that she obviously has no idea about anything workout related

Ms Hill: I started to read your column but stopped after I read "Fraud-ger". Wonderful, a supposedly smart columnist can't write a definitive article without making fun of someones' name. I am no longer interested in any comment you might make on the subject since you no longer have any credibility.

Just a couple quick thoughts.
1. Yes, Hill is notorious for being able to crucify player A for something and defend player B for very similar actions. You can point out race if you like, and maybe thats her motivating factor. Regardless, its difficult to read her work without assuming it will be slanted.
2. Clemens really was in a no win situation here. When he stayed quiet, he had something to hide. When he acted angry, he was playing it up like someone cheating on their spouse. Don't get me wrong, I am in NO WAY saying that Clemens is innocent. I'm just saying that once this report broke, the biggest name in it was going to look guilty. But to be fair, as a friend said to me "Wait, you mean your fastball isn't supposed to gain power in your late 30's?"
3. With all the real issues going on in our country, IE war, poverty, elections, ect, is anyone else sickened by the fact that Congress and the Government is so heavily involved in A CHILD'S GAME OF CATCH THE BALL?! Look i understand MLB has to clean up their business, but lets leave the Government to deal with big boy problems.

RedMagma

Posts : 3654
Join date : 2007-12-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Q & A and direct from Baseball America.

Post  RedMagma on Tue Jan 08, 2008 8:46 am

J. Hill why do you find it difficult to believe Roger? Oh... he did not come out on the phone call and demand that McNamee say he did not use steroids and why call McNamee at all. First he did say he wanted McNamee to "tell the truth" .. he could not say much else as your own ESPN lawyers said he could not do more or face witness tampering charges and second McNamee called Roger with news of his sick son and I am sure that part of the conversation was not aired for us to listen to. J. Hill if you believe that the feds and McNamee's lawyers did not have that conversation recorded also then you are more of an gomer than I thought.

Does anyone remember the 50's when congress went after anyone they thought was a communist. They always wanted several names not just one. McNamee obviously (via A.P.' confession) knew a legitimate name but I am sure they wanted a bigger fish with bigger guilt. As has been said here who better to pick on than to pick on then the "Red Sox Turncoat".

I am not saying I believe one side over another. I am sure this story will take many more turns before it is over and anyone who rushes to judgment is proving Rogers point, "guilty before proven innocent". I think this all may come down to Andy's being called to court or congress.

J. Hill you did not believe a certain coach would stay at LSU... well not only did he stay but he is on the top of the world today. Stop being such a bitter person and get over your man hating issue

RedMagma

Posts : 3654
Join date : 2007-12-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Q & A and direct from Baseball America.

Post  RedMagma on Tue Jan 08, 2008 8:47 am

a lot of people see clemens' arrogance as his tragic flaw. in this case, i think it's what saves him. i could see him saying - i'm roger clemens, i'm superman, i don't need roids and even if i did i'd never admit it to myself - far more than i could see him saying - yeah, i'm just mortal like everyone else so stick a needle in me. needing steroids is admitting that you're mortal, and i can't see nutty rog ever doing that.

so what have we? mcnamee in a room w/mitchell, who works for the red sox. he needs a big fish or he looks like a copout. pettitte comes up, and rog by association. a huge fish who's retiring anyway, so we won't see the face of the steroid era on the field for another 10 years. sox hate clemens because he dissed em, and because they never won a ring while he was there, but then he goes off and wins rings for their hated enemy the yanks. so bring rog down, and at the same time make the yanks look like they'll do more than just spend to win - they'll employ cheaters too. so clemens. and he's been successful, so there's your proof. a W for MLB and the sox, L for the yanks, and rog who's expendable=retiring anyway.

all we don't have yet is what mcnamee gets out of this. book deal? he said he declined one already. will he get other offers? yes, and better ones. he holds out, the price goes up. that could be it. keep your eye on his bank account, and where the transfers are coming from. epstein, sox nation, city of boston, mlb, dunno. eyes open



Oh, and lest anybody forget, this is the same writer who went nuts on the Duke lacross team, similarly judging and convicting them, even though her grasp of what went on was limited to a black woman accused white athletes of raping her. Good enough for Jemele!

Learn your craft, then come back in ten years when you might be halfway decent at it


Would someone at ESPN jsut get rid of her and let her go post as random cyberspace girl blogger? Let me see, she tosses credibility out the window in the first line of her article. Fraud-ger? Really? it take her a month to think that one up? To go along with A-fraud, which she came up with? Hmm, strange she has never come up with one of those catchy derogatory nicknames for Barry eh? And for everybody who tries to say she bashes Barry, try again. She wrote one article (and another badly written and executed one also) asking God to keep him from breaking Hank Aaron's record, then writes three more defending Barry from the Feds, the fans, and anybody else who doesn't think that he's been through enough.

To sum up her lack of reporting ability, or even basic understanding of the entire situation in baseball...she says that Clemens is daring the Feds to come after him, and that they should, just like they went after Barry. Completely lost. Utterly off base. Clemens hasn't said bupkis to the Feds, and we will see with him talking to Congress where this might lead, but as of this moment, he's done nothing to confront the Feds. Unlike Barry, who she STILL thinks the Feds were after for steroid use, and not because of perjury. The Feds don't like being lied to and will nail you if you do. They think Bonds lied to them while conducting the BALCO investigation. Clemens hasn't even talked to them. A difference to subtle for her to understand. So please, someone send her to blogland.




Outstanding article Jemele. The phone call makes Mcnamee all the more believable because you can tell that he really does like Clemens and his family which makes it laughable that he would throw Clemens under the bus. When it goes before congress I hope that McNamee goes first,Clemens second and Pettitte third. When they hear the specifics of how these injections where done....where they were done....and when they were done from McNamee's own mouth they will have the ammo to really go after Fraudger. Clemens is nothing more than a punk and he showed it last night. It was a performance Britney Spears would have been proud of. He actually made a veiled threat to do physical harm to McNamee. McNamme had sympathy for Clemens before but after hearing the threat I am sure he is eager for Jan. 16 to come. Clemens is a poor liar and a cheat. Congress will expose him for what he is

RedMagma

Posts : 3654
Join date : 2007-12-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Shaiya

Post  RedMagma on Tue Jan 08, 2008 9:19 am




RedMagma

Posts : 3654
Join date : 2007-12-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Q & A and direct from Baseball America.

Post  RedMagma on Tue Jan 08, 2008 11:14 am

How do you stop Dallas Offense? If I were Giants Defensive coordinator, Do you watch Eagles against Cowboys in week 15, rush four guys?

RedMagma

Posts : 3654
Join date : 2007-12-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Q & A and direct from Baseball America.

Post  RedMagma on Tue Jan 08, 2008 11:17 am

Clemens Hiding Another Tape...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22556748/

NEW YORK - Lawyers for Brian McNamee have demanded that Roger Clemens release tapes of their client talking to investigators working on the pitcher?s behalf prior to the release of the Mitchell Report.

In a press release issued late Monday, attorneys Earl Ward and Richard Emery claim that McNamee spoke to investigators authorized by Clemens and New York Yankees teammate Andy Pettitte to try and discover what would be in the Mitchell Report.

?Brian told these investigators the same thing he told the federal authorities and Senator Mitchell,? the press release said. ?It appears that these investigators may have recorded the interview and we hereby demand the tape be released in its entirety immediately.?


So suddenly the same day as a recorded conversation between Mac and Roger another tape is out there. hmmm this all just sounds so fishy to me. I saw we just let it go and start over. ha h

RedMagma

Posts : 3654
Join date : 2007-12-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Q & A and direct from Baseball America.

Post  RedMagma on Tue Jan 08, 2008 11:24 am

Major League Baseball Scouting Bureau
http://www.hsbaseballweb.com/pro-scouting/mlsb_interview.htm

Posted May 24, 1999
Frank Marcos of the Major League Scouting Bureau, explained the functions of the Bureau, and revealed what they look for when scouting players.

Question: What's the main purpose of the MLB Scouting Bureau?
Answer: We try to provide the best information on prospects to help clubs make more educated selections in the draft


Question: When was the scouting bureau formed?
Answer: In 1974, ownership developed the idea to centralize scouting. It was not part of the Commissioner's Office. It was an independent group supported by the clubs. In 1985 (Commissioner) Peter Uebberoth brought the Major League Scouting Bureau under the umbrella of the Commissioner's Office


Question::Why was it started?
Answer: Cost was a major issue. It allows the club to get information for a fraction of the price of having two full-time scouts of their own. They're getting a lot more bang for the buck.


Question: How many scouts work for the MLB Scouting Bureau?
Answer: We have 34 full-time scouts and 13 part-time scouts across the United States, Canada and Puerto Rico


Question: How do your scouts rate prospects?
Answer: We have basic generic things that we apply to both pitchers and position players and then we have specific things for position players and pitchers. We grade position players on hitting ability, power, running speed, arm strength and fielding. We use a scale of 2-8 in each category to grade our players and come up with an OFP (Overall Future Potential). A total range of 40-80 covers Major League prospects. We have fringe, average and definite prospect (categories). As the number gets higher, the better the prospect is.

We grade pitchers on fastball, curveball, slider and other (if the pitcher throws a knuckler or split-finger). If the pitcher doesn't throw an "other," he gets graded on the three he throws. But that's when a scout's instincts come into play. If a pitcher only throws two pitches, but the scout sees he has the arm instinct to develop a slider, he will grade him higher. A scout can move a number up if he feels the potential is higher.

The generic qualities that apply to both position players and pitchers are like aggressiveness, instinct, dedication and work ethic


Question: Predicting who will make a good Major League pitcher must be especially difficult
Answer: You can always tell arm strength. We have radar guns for that, but you can't put a radar gun on a player's heart or head. If you had seen Todd Van Poppel, you would have been sure he was a can't miss. But he did. And then sometimes you have overachievers. Orel Hershiser is a great example. Not too many people were high on him


Question: How does somebody become a prospect? How do you decide who to scout?
Answer: Every year our goal is the June draft. After that, we gear up for the summer, when we get a chance to see younger prospects we didn't have time for before the draft (Prior to the draft MLB scouts are busy looking at those eligible for that year's draft). We look at what we call "follows," mostly 15 and 16 year-olds. There are showcase events that have been great for younger kids. They have a chance to compete against the top kids in the country. The more visibility (a kid) has to the scouts, the better.

We develop a follow list by the end of the summer or early the next fall. We have a list of five to six hundred players that are eligible for the 2000 draft. In addition, we'll have lists of players eligible for the 2001 and 2002 drafts. We're always trying to stay ahead.

We also get letters, phone calls, faxes from parents, girlfriends, coaches, agents about players and sometimes it is very valuable information. Some guys are creative. We get videotapes, color shots of their swings. I guess they see it as an investment in their future and are willing to go to that extent.

You can never have too much information. We will pass information on to the scout in the area. We'll also provide players with a list for try-out camps. We have 35 try-out camps in June throughout the country and the clubs hold camps as well. It's a chance for a player who doesn't have the chance to be seen to show what they can do

RedMagma

Posts : 3654
Join date : 2007-12-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Q & A and direct from Baseball America.

Post  RedMagma on Tue Jan 08, 2008 11:27 am

What is Difference between Major League Scout and Amateur Scout? The Yankees Pete Mackanin, the man who ended 2007 as the Reds’ interim manager, will join the Yankees as a scout.

RedMagma

Posts : 3654
Join date : 2007-12-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Q & A and direct from Baseball America.

Post  RedMagma on Tue Jan 08, 2008 11:27 am

Orioles reportedly closer to dealing Bedard

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22548469/

According to the report, the Mariners are unwilling to part with top pitching prospect Brandon Morrow, but in addition to Jones might be willing to deal young prospects Jeff Clement, a catcher, and Matt Tuiasosopo, a third baseman.

The report said that Baltimore might prefer either left-hander Tony Butler, right-hander Chris Tillman or 17-year-old shortstop Carlos Triunfel.

RedMagma

Posts : 3654
Join date : 2007-12-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Q & A and direct from Baseball America.

Post  RedMagma on Tue Jan 08, 2008 11:31 am

Red Sox fans should keep their mouths shut. There is a Boston trainer out there somewhere so watch how self-righteous you sound now. Even your Peter Gammons (the pillar of un-biased reporting...sarcasm intended) said its not that there are no Red Sox players possibly using (or have used) it's that it was a NY trainer that gave the information. The mitchell report isn't a complete listing folks. Your team is next :-)

--"this is congress and baseball's fault."

That's a pretty obnoxious statement to make. So the players were decent enough to stay away from PEDs and you're blaming it on someone else?

--"According to Clemens, he and Pettite never talked about steroids. So how can Andy help Roger? "

That's according to Clemens. Maybe Andy can confirm what Clemens has said to be true or false. Maybe they never did talk about steroids.

--"He already acknowledged the use of HGH so what else does he really need to say to anyone."

How about "I saw McNamee shot up Roger"?


If Pettitie would testify it's likely he would deny knowing anything about Clemens possible use of steroids. If he does not it looks worse for Clemens, it looks like he is just not going to attend to avoid either testifying against his friend or he would end up purgering himself, either way, it seems as though it's lose lose for Pettitte. But it looks bad for Clemens with the lack of Pettitte, are we really to believe that close friends with the same trainer keep that many secrets from each other, thats rediculous

Pettite has already admitted to using HGH. He has already tainted his own stats ans his own career by hi own admission.......the ONLY reason he could possible have at this point to NOT testify in front of congress, is that he is protecting someone or someones'!!! He might not only want to protect Roger, but who knows what other names that might spill out of his mouth if he testifies! Roger and Andy have been like 2 peas in a pod for the past 5-6 years. Do you honestly think that we should believe that they shared the same trainer, in the same facilities, at the same time, and Roger had NO idea that Andy had juiced? Do you honestly think that there was never a discussion between the 3 of them about the issue??? Come on!!

RedMagma

Posts : 3654
Join date : 2007-12-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Q & A and direct from Baseball America.

Post  RedMagma on Tue Jan 08, 2008 11:33 am

Mariners won 88 games last year and were ahead of us in the wildcard for most of last season.. now you give them Bedard to go along with King Felix.. Washburn, Carlos Silva.. WOW... we may not make the playoffs next year. Hate to say it.. but we may actually need Santana.

Yeah, not at all, alll it does is make the Mariners better and there will be more teams in the race next year. But having said that outside of Bedard and King Felix they don't have much and their offense probably overproduced a little last year so if they give up a guy like Jones, I can't see it being better or even the same especially since they got good contributions from guys like Jose Guillen who won't be there and Ibanez for a good stretch was playing like an all-star.

If Mariners get Bedard, it may also force the Angels to look into a Santana deal to keep up with all the other AL Teams. Suddenly the Angels won't be able to basaically stand pat like theytry to for the most part every year.

you know who else lacked "that big bat" last year? the dbacks..... they're best offensive player was Eric Byrnez.. ahhaha haha.

and they went further than the all star at every position Yankees.

Why? PITCHING. Now i'm jealous.. I want Bedard!

RedMagma

Posts : 3654
Join date : 2007-12-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Q & A and direct from Baseball America.

Post  RedMagma on Wed Jan 09, 2008 8:58 am

Jan 9, 2008 9:06 am - Note: Hagin Targeted for WFAN

...posted by Matthew Cerrone...

According to Mike Puma in the New York Post, the Mets and WFAN are ‘targeting’ veteran broadcaster Wayne Hagin to replace Tom McCarthy.

Hagin has called games for the A’s, Giants, White Sox, Rockies and Cardinals.

…from what i can gather, neither WFAN nor the Mets had much direction on this once Andy Freed declined their offer to remain in Tampa Bay…initially i believe they were open to every one, from triple-a broadcaster to veteran MLB voices, though i am not sure where they stand today…

…personally, i’d rather they hire an unknown triple-a voice, or some one who at least knows the Mets organization…

…thanks to Peter Wade for the link…

RedMagma

Posts : 3654
Join date : 2007-12-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Q & A and direct from Baseball America.

Post  RedMagma on Wed Jan 09, 2008 9:00 am

Hopefully this will cause Johan to decide against the Yankees, 5 years is not really insulting but one can hope.


Hopefully this will cause Johan to decide against the Yankees, 5 years is not really insulting but one can hope.

More money per year can easily offset the length of the contract...see Andruw Jones' signing.

RedMagma

Posts : 3654
Join date : 2007-12-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Q & A and direct from Baseball America.

Post  RedMagma on Wed Jan 09, 2008 9:01 am

Mark Healey wrote:
Nobody, and I mean nobody wants to deal five nickels for a quarter. $ quarters for a dollar? Maybe.

None of the Mets prospects, with the exception of Gomez and F-Mart, excite anyone. Also, given the lowering of overall value of positional players and the heightened value of anyone who can throw a ball, the Mets' package is nowhere near the Yankee package.


The Mets are apparently willing to listen regarding at least 4 of their top 5 pitchers or so. How is that not at least comparable to the Yankees #1 and their #7/8?

I guess it's just perspective. Let's look at potential ceilings of each package:

IF the Mets put Fernando AND Gomez in a deal with Pelfrey and Mulvey, you're looking at a package of annual MVP candidate + potential all-star leadoff man + #2 + #3 in your rotation.

The Yankees package looks like an annual Cy Young candidate + 4th OF + possible #5. Now switch Marquez or whomever out with Kennedy (which is what the Twins want) and now you're getting into a situation where there's looks significantly better.

Now regarding your comment about the lower value of positional players to pitchers, why have we not traded Reyes if that is true? I still think there are guys out there who feel that a player who can impact 162 games will always have more value than a guy who can impact 35.

But assuming the Twins DO actually feel that they're more inclined to get pitching than positional prospects, then wouldn't it be just as likely for the Yankees and Red Sox to hold on to their top guys and try to work on lesser packages? Sources are definitely mixed on whether Hughes is available. The Red Sox have NEVER included Buchholz as part of the deal.

RedMagma

Posts : 3654
Join date : 2007-12-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Q & A and direct from Baseball America.

Post  RedMagma on Wed Jan 09, 2008 9:01 am

Baseball America ranks ‘em

January
9

Baseball America ranked the top 10 Yankees prospects.

Here’s what they had:
1. Joba Chamberlain, rhp
2. Austin Jackson, of
3. Jose Tabata, of
4. Ian Kennedy, rhp
5. Alan Horne, rhp
6. Jesus Montero, c
7. Jeff Marquez, rhp
8. Brett Gardner, of
9. Ross Ohlendorf, rhp
10. Andrew Brackman, rhp

Note: Phil Hughes had too many innings to be considered a prospect by BA’s rules.

Ranking prospects is a tricky business. Statistics tell you only so much because it’s so difficult to gauge the competition and ballpark factors. Certain leagues are heavy with pitchers, others with hitters. Hitting .300 in the Florida State League is pretty good. In the South Atlantic League not so much.

Baseball America’s rankings are solid because their writers talk to team executives and scouts. You need a mix of stats, scouting reports and the ability to project.

Even then, it’s still a roll of the dice. Everybody was excited about first-round pick C.J. Henry a few years ago. BA ranked him fourth in their rankings in 2006. He has yet to get out Class A ball. Traded to the Phillies as part of the Bobby Abreu trade, he was released and is back with the Yankees.

So enjoy following the prospects, but don’t fall in love. For every Derek Jeter, the Yankees had a two dozen kids who are coaching their old high school teams now.

RedMagma

Posts : 3654
Join date : 2007-12-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Q & A and direct from Baseball America.

Post  RedMagma on Wed Jan 09, 2008 9:03 am

If what Hank is doing is tampering, the Mets did the same thing earlier this offseason when I heard a report on ESPN radio, where Minaya said that the Mets would offer a 7 year deal to Johan, even though they wouldnt go above 5 for Zito.

RedMagma

Posts : 3654
Join date : 2007-12-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Q & A and direct from Baseball America.

Post  RedMagma on Wed Jan 09, 2008 9:04 am

I think it's not tampering because they are involved in negotiations with Santana’s team?… It’s only tampering if the Twins file charges against the yankees with MLB. As long as there is a potential trade on the table between the two teams the Twins will not file charges.Hank needs to shut up and He's a bad businessman.

if what Hank is doing is tampering, the Mets did the same thing earlier this offseason when I heard a report on ESPN radio, where Minaya said that the Mets would offer a 7 year deal to Johan, even though they wouldnt go above 5 for Zito.

RedMagma

Posts : 3654
Join date : 2007-12-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Q & A and direct from Baseball America.

Post  RedMagma on Wed Jan 09, 2008 9:14 am

man so the yanks wont give him more than 5 yrs so i bet he still go there ... that means if johan will go to yanks and bo sox for 5 yrs ...the mets have to give him 6 or 7 to get him to wave ntc ,..... that would be messed up

Wouldn't saying that be considered tampering?
Cashman must be counting the days until he is out of there. Do they even allow him to make decisions anymore?



I actually believe this; it would be just the sort of mistake Hank would make.

Santana's agent said he's looking for 7/140. Hank will probably come back with 5/125... fewer years, but more per year.

The mistake is that the Yankees would get 2 fewer years for only 15 million or so less. 7.5m per year for Santana's age 35 and 36 seasons? Hell, even if he was league average those years, he'd be worth it. The risk is worth the extra money.




Tampering is a very fine line. As much as I hate hank I dont think this would qualify as tampering. I have heard (yet not from a reliable source) that Cashman will be out the door at the end of the 08 contract. If they are not going to let him do his job, there is no point in him being there. He has been doing his best to rebuild the 90's yankees team and hank is about to demolish all his work with one fell swoop.

However. my take on the situation as i've posted before, is that the yankees are not really interested in Johan. After signing Arod, they lose giambi after 08, they lose mussina i believe after 08, they lose pettite if he retires after 08, they just lost clemens, the pattern is they are trying to free up the payroll for a big signing in '09 for the new stadium. I dont believe they are actually interested, and i believe hanks mouth is proving it. He is trying his hardest to get the red sox to lose some players that are not disposable income. They have plenty of young starters, lester is not really a necessity to this red sox team. crisp is replaced by ellsbury. and lowrie and masterson are not MLB ready yet according to most sources. Ellsbury also is disposable as good as he is. There is an abundance of good outfielders between the current roster and their minor league system. dont forget if they hold crisp, they still possess the best defensive center fielder in the A.L. maybe short of torii hunter, and a great deal of speed to go along with an average bat. The yankees want the sox to up their deal and actually lose something in this trade. The yankees would be retarded to trade hughes. melky i can see being traded as the yanks have too many outfielders as it is, but hughes is a dominant young pitcher who has already shown before his injury that he has what it takes to perform in the Majors. keep in mind his 6 inning no hitter the day he got injured. If you dont think hes workin his ass off to get back in top form you are retarded. Hughes is a great asset to this organization. So as i said my prediction: This will go on until the twins have no time left to trade Johan (Johan said he will not waive his clause once the spring training begins) at which time Johan will be putting on a boston jersey. This new peice of info basically reiterates what i just said. The sox said they will give him 7 years 150 million if thats what he wants. why would he go to the yankees for 5 years 100 million? it just doesn't make sense.


And metafrantic i agree with you entirely. the whole situation doesn't make sense. hanks a fool lol.

Also pitcher prices are going to go up. they are saying that by 2010 we will see a pitcher (most likely josh beckett or someone of his caliber) ask for the same thing arod got 275 million for 10 years, and will probably get some offers. pitching is such a necessity and as is proven year after year hitting doesn't win u a championship. pitching does. Diamondbacks, red sox, marlins, were all pitching teams. that covers the last like 5 years?



Hank Hearts Cash


http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/yankees/ny-spyside075491318dec07,0,5598267.story

From Kat O'Brien -

"We haven't discussed [Brian Cashman's] extension yet, but he's part of the Yankee family and has been for 21 years. I don't see any reason to not continue that."

"He's busy, we're busy, there just hasn't been any detailed discussion about that," Steinbrenner said. "Is Brian's job on the line because of what the team does this year? No, that's sensationalism to say it's based on 2008 ... I'm very pleased with what Brian and Damon [Oppenheimer] and Mark Newman and all the scouts and people have done with the drafts, with the last three drafts."

Looks like Brian can write his own ticket when it comes to Hank.

http://www.nj.com/yankees/ledger/index.ssf?/base/sports-2/119959777672890.xml&coll=1&thispage=1


On his relationship with general manager Brian Cashman:

"(Brian) can be more conservative with our money than we are. He put back together our organization. I've always told him, there are things that have to be my final decision. But he's the general manager, and he has the right to try and talk me out of it. And he has talked me out of it."


Theo aka Flip-flopper, I thought He quit and then went back to Redsox in gorilla outfit so Redsox can finish Josh Beckett trade.. Gimme me break.

RedMagma

Posts : 3654
Join date : 2007-12-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Q & A and direct from Baseball America.

Post  RedMagma on Wed Jan 09, 2008 9:18 am

Also

looks like the Mariners are putting together a good package for Bedard..

Anyone else here believe that the Mariners Are in the running for Johan??

It’s always reported that Its just the Mets, Sox, and Yanks trying to trade for Johan, but i think it would be just crazy if seattle would pony up for bedard, but not johan..

So, IMHO, seattle probably IS still in the running for Johan

Hank has now stated that the Yankees won’t give Santana more than 5 year extension. And talks with the Red Sox are dormant. (with the Red Sox being notorious for refusing to give long-term contracts, in the Bill James era). Does this look to anyone else like the Twins’ chances of signing Johan to an extension just went up?

Sorry, I skimmed the comments and saw “TWolves” and assumed there was no discussion of Santana in the MH comments.

I also think Seattle could be a player, still…Bavasi says that Morrow isn’t untouchable. Problem is, we don’t need Clement. But Jones-Morrow-Triunfel-Clement would be a good trade.

MH says:

January 9th, 2008 at 9:28 am

AM i agree

I dont really see the mariners having that stud pitching prospect that we want, but they could offer some good talent! no doubt about that..

yapper says:

January 9th, 2008 at 9:42 am

Good. If noone will give him more than 5 years. The Twins will resign him.
5 years 110 mill. Lets do it. Keep the best pitcher in baseball.
Maybe the days of idiotic contracts are starting their downhill slide.



# Doreen January 9th, 2008 at 10:15 am

Jennifer –

Me, too!

We’re going 8/23 (sat. game). Seats are all the way out in right field, but that’s better than last time we went!
# String Beanfellow January 9th, 2008 at 10:16 am

Insurance on contracts also cost a lot of money, AND to top it off, insurance on pitchers is a lot harder to get when they are longer term contracts.
# whozat January 9th, 2008 at 10:16 am

“Why not get 2 more yrs at 7.5 per ? Contracts are insured if he gets hurt.”

it costs even MORE money to insure the deal.

Also, years are more of a problem than dollars for the Yanks. at 7/140, he’s got two years at 20 per at the end where the odds are starting to get pretty good that you don’t want him, at least not at that price. You can’t trade him because no one wants to eat that money, so now you’re stuck with him.

Spending more $$ per year for fewer years is sort of the ideal for a team with lots of money. You pay a premium to not have to deal with the player’s decline phase.
# jennifer- Hip Hip Jorge January 9th, 2008 at 10:16 am

I got 4/19 and 4/20. Club level seats 50 a piece. Club level seats there are great!!
# mike eff January 9th, 2008 at 10:17 am

hey did you guys order holiday pack tickets? i’ve been waiting for mine to get here. when did yours arrive?
mike
# Doreen January 9th, 2008 at 10:18 am

We’re in club level, also. We decided on August, to go as a foursome when the college kid is home!
# raymagnetic January 9th, 2008 at 10:18 am

“He doesn’t need to. On the open market he’s going to get 7 years and it wouldn’t be that surprising if he got $154 to $175 million. The Mets alone would probably meet any of his contract demands. But Santana would have the Yankees, Mets, Sox and perhaps the Angels (among many others) bidding on him.

He’s not just going to “settle” for what the yankees are willing to give him or for that matter what the sox are willing to give him. If he doesn’t like the parameters he won’t sign an extension or won’t approve the deal.

He has all the leverage in this.”

What if he doesn’t accept the $125 mil 5 year extension and then he gets hurt or has a pitcher’s version of an Andruw Jones type of year, would he still have all the leverage then? If he gets offered 25 mil for 5 years I think he takes it.
# SJ44 January 9th, 2008 at 10:19 am

Can’t insure pitchers contracts for longer than 5 years.

That’s why teams use 5 as the “magic” number.

Any pitchers contracts over 5 years, and the team takes the risk (financially) on the extra years.

Hank isn’t saying anything he hasn’t told the Twins or, by proxy, his agents.

He’s not exactly breaking news here.
# Boston Dave January 9th, 2008 at 10:20 am



Look at what Zito got. 7/140 is a bargain… maybe its risky but its easily a fair market value offer.
# TurnTwo January 9th, 2008 at 10:20 am

yeah, i’m not negotiating here, i’m just saying i could see 5/$125 as a likely outcome.

it’s like Vernon Wells last year… Jays offered him a huge extention, but at the time, were he on the FA market, he might have been able to squeeze an extra year or a couple more bucks out of someone…. but the $120 million, or whatever he signed for, is a ton of money to turn down.
# Boston Dave January 9th, 2008 at 10:22 am

SJ -

what is the advantage in Hank saying this? Maybe I am missing that.
# jennifer- Hip Hip Jorge January 9th, 2008 at 10:22 am

Club level seats are best in August. If you get too hot you can go and cool off inside. I’ll probably need it for heat considering the April 19th game is 7pm.
# CB January 9th, 2008 at 10:23 am

Santana has already delayed hitting free agency by signing that last contract.

This is going to be his last chance to get a major deal. If he signs a 5 year deal he’ll be 35 when its finished. He’s not going to get another huge payday.

Younger players and much older players may be willing to sign for fewer years at a higher dollar average. But I don’t see Santana agreeing to that when he has all the leverage.

Santana’s last contract got him security for life. This opportunity is his chance to leverage all of his value for what its worth. He’s not going to just settle for a deal that not what he wants.

At his age its the total dollar value of the contract that matters much, much more than the trade off involved in signing for a more money per year at a higher average value.

RedMagma

Posts : 3654
Join date : 2007-12-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Q & A and direct from Baseball America.

Post  RedMagma on Wed Jan 09, 2008 9:19 am

#

agree with whozat and raymagetic here. its too much guaranteed money for Santana to turn down or haggle with at that point.
# Buddy Biancalana January 9th, 2008 at 10:24 am

After Zito’s performance last year in a pitchers park I wouldn’t call $18M a bargain & it may get worse with the Giants non existent offense.
# SJ44 January 9th, 2008 at 10:27 am

There isn’t any advantage or disadvantage. He’s just answering a question posed to him.

When he took over, he said he wouldn’t lie. If he can’t say something, he will say it but, he won’t lie.

Seems to me, he’s holding up his end of the deal. He keeps the media and the fans informed by being quoted directly and isn’t (or doesn’t seem to be) lying to anybody.

We can’t have it both ways as fans. We don’t like the Howard Rubenstein driven statements and want to be kept in the loop to what’s going on.

Then, when Hank does exactly that, we rip him for it.

Nothing the guy is saying will be a roadblock in doing a deal.

The issue isn’t his mouth. Its whether or not the Yankees want to take on another huge contract and give up a couple of very valuable young players.
# i miss bernie January 9th, 2008 at 10:27 am

i have to disagree with anyone that would make the case the 5/125 is better than 7/140. 7.5M/year in 2008 dollars doesnt buy you a decent 8th inning pitcher now, and we’re talking 7.5M in 2013/14 dollars. would you pay 7.5 M for andy pettite now, hes about the age santana will be then.
# Florida Yank January 9th, 2008 at 10:28 am

I’m in agreement with Green Beret 7. IF Mitch Hilligoss, OF Seth Fortenberry, and LHP Michael Dunn are among prospects to keep a keen eye on. They’re likely to be watched closely by manager Luis Sojo at Single A Tampa.

36 days until pitchers and catchers report to Legends Field.
# raymagnetic January 9th, 2008 at 10:30 am

“This is going to be his last chance to get a major deal. If he signs a 5 year deal he’ll be 35 when its finished. He’s not going to get another huge payday.”

As I said earlier, if Andy Pettitte is getting 16 mil this year, then when Santana is 35 he can get a deal for more then 16 mil. Unless he’s hurt at the end of year 5. If he/you thinks he’ll get hurt then what’s the point of the Yankees signing a 7 year deal with him?

I don’t think anybody going to give him 7 years 140. Not even the Mets are that dumb, especially after what happened with Pedro.
# CB January 9th, 2008 at 10:30 am

“What if he doesn’t accept the $125 mil 5 year extension and then he gets hurt or has a pitcher’s version of an Andruw Jones type of year, would he still have all the leverage then? If he gets offered 25 mil for 5 years I think he takes it.”

Those are definitely possibilities. Its a matter of how much risk Santana is willing to absorb.

But that’s true of any player coming up for free agency.

Santna’s last contract made him $40 million. He deferred free agency a few years in signing that contract. He was probably willing to do that for the security it offered.

Now is his chance to cash in in a major way. I don’t see an athlete of that stature being worried that his performance will suddenly decline in his contract year. Injuries are always possible.

But Santana already turned down the Twins $20 million per year X 4 year deal. That tells you he’s willing to risk a guaranteed $80 million vs. the prospect of injury/ under performance.

I can’t imagine Santana doesn’t look at Zito’s deal and think to himself I’m ten times the pitcher Zito is.

Zito’s deal is going to be the absolute floor. Santana is going to want and command considerably more than that.
# raymagnetic January 9th, 2008 at 10:31 am

more than 16 mil.
# TurnTwo January 9th, 2008 at 10:38 am

CB, you dont think $125 million is cashing in “in a major way”?

and $125 million is certainly more significant than the Twins $80 million offer, especially considering its only giving one more year.
# i miss bernie January 9th, 2008 at 10:39 am

if i was brian cashman (if only….) and santana was a FA and asked for 7/$140M i wouldnt be able to get the pen into his hand fast enough
# raymagnetic January 9th, 2008 at 10:39 am

“i have to disagree with anyone that would make the case the 5/125 is better than 7/140. 7.5M/year in 2008 dollars doesnt buy you a decent 8th inning pitcher now, and we’re talking 7.5M in 2013/14 dollars. would you pay 7.5 M for andy pettite now, hes about the age santana will be then.”

I don’t know why you keep calling it 7.5 mil in 2013. It’d be 20 Mil in 2013.

If I’m Santana’s agent I know that 5 years 125mil > 7 years 140mil.
# whozat January 9th, 2008 at 10:45 am

“i have to disagree with anyone that would make the case the 5/125 is better than 7/140. 7.5M/year in 2008 dollars doesnt buy you a decent 8th inning pitcher now, and we’re talking 7.5M in 2013/14 dollars.”

Except that’s not how it works…if it’s 7/140, it’ll be roughly 20 per. So, the deal will have 2/40 left on it. I’ll give andy 1/16 now because I know he’s healthy. Being willing to commit to a 2/40 contract five years ahead of time is MUCH riskier. We have NO idea what will happen between now and then.
# GreenBeret7 January 9th, 2008 at 10:46 am

Florida, if the right hitting coach gets a hold of Hilligoss, and teach him to pull the middle in pitches and elevate the ball, it may move him from a Boggs type hitter to a Mattingly type. He has a great gap type stroke, but, they are low line drives…He may only end up a Jeter type, but, nothing wrong there, either. Fortenbury has a great arm, plays exceptional defense in all three outfield slots, hits for power and runs the bases well…should be an annual 20 homer, 20 steal guy…he does strike out, though, so he has some holes. Watched Jackson in the first part of the season, and, he’s going to be special.
# JRVJ January 9th, 2008 at 10:46 am

SJ44,

Ok, contracts can’t be insured over 5 years, but surely insurance premiums are paid yearly and both the contract and policy can vest for an extra year if Year 1 Santana complies with certain thresshold items (including a physical).
# i miss bernie January 9th, 2008 at 10:47 am

ray you completly missed the point. it was suggested that santana would ask for 7/140 and that the yankees would counter with 5/125 and several of us made the point that its much better for the yankees to take the 7/140 because of the 2 extra years at 15M total.
# ed January 9th, 2008 at 10:49 am

Hey ET90210,

If Brackman was healthy last year, he wouldn’t have lasted long enough for the Yankees to draft him.

Also, in that site you sent, there was a good piece on Hank continuing to ruin the Yanks chances at Santana:

http://mlbfleecefactor.com/2008/01/09/santana-update-yanks-wont-go-past-5-years/
# Anthony January 9th, 2008 at 10:50 am

I like Hank and I like when he says arrogant Yankee things, but I don’t know about him telling everybody what he’s thinking unless it’s pure bluff. In business, I’m generally of the keep quiet and never let the enemy know why you are making your decisions school.
# Doreen January 9th, 2008 at 10:51 am

Never thought I’d be saying it’s a relief to be having the same old Santana conversation!

Jennifer –

At least it’s a night game, so the direct sun shouldn’t be a problem. I just got an e-mail from my husband reminding me what a romantic way that will be to spend our anniversary. I told him what could be better - baseball, hotdogs, mom (me), and all we need is the applie pie! Besides, we’ll go to a nice dinner pre-game.
# TurnTwo January 9th, 2008 at 10:52 am

you can say its better for the yankees to go 7/140, but Hank just said in this article, he’s not going past 5… kind of makes the argument unnecessary, right?

we were just using 7/140 to come up with a yearly salary for 5 years that Santana might be amenable to by sacrificing the extra 2 years on the contract right now.
# CB January 9th, 2008 at 10:53 am

TurnTwo,

Don’t get me wrong - $125 million is a lot of money. But I think people tend to look at compensation based on what their peers receive and what the market may seem to yield.

IMO Santana is going to be the subject of an intense bidding war if he hits the market.

Think about it this way - when was the last time a pitcher of Santana’s stature hit the Free Agent Market?

I can’t think of one - neither Mussina when the yankees first signed him nor Zito comes even close.

In fact its not common that a pitcher of that stature even gets less than a year away from hitting the market.

IMO Santana will get more than $125 million on the open market - easily. I think on the open market he’d get $150-$175 million.

When is the last time the Yankees, Mets, and Red Sox were all chasing the same free agent? All of them will be in on the bidding for Santana. That’s an agent’s dream.

He’s going to want to sign the biggest pitcher contract in history. The Players Union wants him to hit the open market to create a new benchmark for pitchers salaries.

If he’s come this far to free agency he’s either going to only approve a trade for exactly the deal he wants or he’s going to hit the market. He’s not going to settle. He doesn’t need to leave money on the table.

If he signs for 5 years he’s 35 again on the market. He easily could be on the downside or easily hurt by then. There’s no reason for him to assume that risk when he could sign for a 6th or 7th year now and guarantee himself another $40-50 million. He won’t get than much as a 35 year old on the market and could get nothing if he gets hurt.

He has the leverage. He’s going to make the club signing him take the risk.
# ed January 9th, 2008 at 10:53 am

But why make public the 5 year stance??? Wait until the trade is made and then play hardball during the 72 hour negotiation window. I dont get it.
# raymagnetic January 9th, 2008 at 10:53 am

“ray you completly missed the point. it was suggested that santana would ask for 7/140 and that the yankees would counter with 5/125 and several of us made the point that its much better for the yankees to take the 7/140 because of the 2 extra years at 15M total.”

No I didn’t, I’m looking at in from the Yankees point of view. The Yankees don’t want to give Santana a 7 year deal. Since they are only going 5 years they have to pay him more money. It’s much safer from the Yankees perspective to only go 5 years on a pitcher no matter how good that pitcher is.
# Boston Dave January 9th, 2008 at 10:55 am

SJ -

If there is a chance that Hanks public comments will have any negative impact on the Yankees and even indirectly impact their ability to make deals, acquire players, etc then I would rather be in the dark. Just me.
# Buddy Biancalana January 9th, 2008 at 10:56 am

It would be great to know whether Cashman really cares what Hank says or doesn’t say. My guess is no.

RedMagma

Posts : 3654
Join date : 2007-12-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Q & A and direct from Baseball America.

Post  RedMagma on Wed Jan 09, 2008 9:19 am

CB, the same exact things were being said when ARod opted out of his deal… all these big market teams could afford him, had a need for him, and could lock him up for when he was going to break all the records, so he could go into the HoF with that team’s cap.

and what happened? not a single team came to the plate with a deal really even close to what the Yankees were willing to give.

sure, you could argue that a bidding war would ensue, and he COULD get $150 million, but its highly unlikely.

i understand the idea of wanting to hold the contract to 5 years, but any smart buisness man would say, if im gonna save $5M per year for each of the 1st 5 years of the contract by signing him for an extra 2 years, it’s to my advantage.
the idea of holding it to a 5 year contract is based on the idea of paying close to the same rate for the entire lenght of the contract which means the actual comparison would be 5/$125 verses 7/$175M, but thats not the numbers that were presented in the comment i was responding to

RedMagma

Posts : 3654
Join date : 2007-12-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Q & A and direct from Baseball America.

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 4 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum