brought over from last threat. What an exciting day!

The Yankees have agreed to trade Melky Cabrera, Mike Dunn and a minor leaguer to the Braves for Javier Vazquez and Boone Logan.

-- Mark Feinsand

I just hope the Yankees have someone in the organization who can get his mechanics straightened out if they get out of whack in mid-season. The last time around, the Yankees claimed they couldn't straighten him out in mid-season, that it had to wait until the winter.

That didn't help much in the postseason.

[2] Enough has changed in the organization since 2003, Bruce, that I wouldn't be worried about it.

[1] Also from the last thread:

"If that is the deal, that is a steal. I will gladly take that.

But I have two concerns: who plays LF now, and (to me more importantly) who gets bumped from the rotation, Joba or Phil? I’m not really worried about LF, just curious – but the pitching, I am worried about. I think it ends up being Hughes, but that is very sad to me, because he needs more innings if he’s ever going to be a starter. Now if Giradi makes him the long-man, my concerns are lessened, but . . ."

[3] Maybe they groom Hughes to be the closer.

[2] It seems clearer and clearer to me that he was hurt in 2003.It was his only truly bad season. He won't be as good as last season, but he has consistently had alternating good seasons (~ 120 ERA+) and average seasons (~ 98 ERA+), with lots of innings.

[3] It looks more and more (to me) like Joba will get bumped back to the BP. I really want to see both Joba/Hughes get legitimate shots at starting, but I am losing faith daily.

[4] Its possible, I suppose, though my hope is that they groom Hughes as a starter, with the intent that he takes over for Pettitte next year. And, of course, between Burnett and Pettitte and the possibility for injuries, I could easily see Hughes getting time in the rotation this year.

LF indeed. They must be closing in on Damon, right? They're not gonna put Granderson in Left, Swisher in Right and Gardner in center, are they?

I mean, I'll watch the games no matter what. I like Gardner enough, and I absolutely love Javy. But still. It stands to reason Damon is near. Right?

brought over from the last thread too:

pobrecito – i don’t want melky to go

good to point out william, re: expectations on javy.
last year was the first year his hr/9 was below 2 (1.8) – which though i don’t think he was really home run javy, he will have a tough time repeating
his bb/9 tied a career low at 1.8 – he obviously needs to keep that around his career average or better.

[3] very valid questions shaun.
pitching depth is a tricky animal.

[3] LF is now a real hole. The Yankees do not have anyone to play it.

As for the rotation, it was clear over the past week that the Yankees had absolutely no intention of trusting both Joba and Phil in the rotation this season (Cashman all but said as much). I think the plan is actually pretty clear. Joba, who no longer has a limit, will start in the rotation and Hughes, who does have a limit, will start in the pen. If Joba doesn’t put it all together in the first half, the roles will be swapped. I think that’s a smart plan regardless because you simply can not have Hughes be a 140 IP starter…it will be the same disaster that Joba was this year.

[4] A little bit of my soul just died.

[9] LF is now a real hole. The Yankees do not have anyone to play it.

Of course, this all depends on how one views Gardner relative to Melky. I still think it's a wash, but I could be wrong. Hoffman is still the dark horse.

If Joba doesn’t put it all together in the first half, the roles will be swapped. I think that’s a smart plan regardless because you simply can not have Hughes be a 140 IP starter…

That's true. And come to think of it, I bitched last year that converting Hughes to a one inning specialist in 2009 would cost significantly in 2010.

Whatever.

According to Sherman, the third player in the deal is Arodys Vizcaino, who isn't an insignificant propsect.

[8] I suspect that they will get the league average version of Javy (see 2005, 2006, 2008), with a 1.25 WHIP and some HRs, but also about 200 INN. For a #3/4 starter that's not too bad.

[11] Clearly, but I am admittedly a big Melky fan and think he was improving toward being a solid to pretty good player.

[13] That was my conclusion as well...both on the expectation and the value. I just hope Javy doesn't get caught up in the same level of expectations that hurt him last time around.

[14] yeah this is a bit sad for william, the hawk, myself , perhaps hoss an mattpat, and the other "melky supporters"

Well, if you are a Philly fan, you are ecstatic that the Braves made this deal.

I guess Damon IS coming back.

I'll miss Melky too, but getting "good Javy" back is wonderful.

From Tyler Kepner:
Yanks traded Nick Johnson for Vazquez, who gave up grand slam to Damon in '04 ALCS. Now Damon's gone, and Nick and Javy are back. Wild.

[14] [16] Buck up, kids. I remained convinced that Gardy/Hoffy will not be starting teh entire year in LF. Another move is a-comin'.

[18] It's like Cashman is making amends for past sins.

Go with the grace, Sweet Melky. Los dias de dos leches son no mas.

[19] This is like the climatic scene from the Godfather. Right now, Cashman is standing godfather at a baptism as all of these moves are being announced.

Arodys is the Yanks #2 or #3 prospect, really the only pitcher in the system with legit top of the rotation (if not quite ace/#1) potential (ignoring Brackman). This makes the deal a lot more suspect. I duno about this deal anymore - would rather see Nova or Z-Mac as the third player going. I just got a lot more ambivalent.

I would guess this means we'll have a super defensive outfield, with Gardner in CF and Granderon in LF? That would be a sight!

Meanwhile, what must Mets fans be thinking?

[17] Feinsand just tweeted that he was told "this does NOT re-open the door for Johnny Damon to come back to the Bronx."

Is Holliday already wrapped up in a pending deal? Is he a possibility?

I don't buy the talk about this meaning Joba or Phil to the BP for good. I would like to see Phil start the season in the AAA rotation. If there's an injury in the first half, he comes up and takes that slot. If not, he can pitch out of the ML BP for the second half, and still get something close to 150 innings, while still pitching in the majors for some portion of that (and helping the team down the stretch).

[22] I don't think he is that high, but he is definitely top-15, so it's not an insignificant addition and definitely makes the deal more reasonable for the Braves.

If the plan is to go with Gardner than I think this deal becomes a net loss. If they get someone else, it's probably break even, but better matches each team's needs.

[16] Yeah. I mean, I get it, but I don't really like it. I reluctantly accept it. If the trade was for a real #2 I think I could get behind the deal more. I thought the Yanks needed another starter, but I would have been content to see Hughes and Chamberlain as 4 and 5 (or 5 and 4). I guess I feel a little house money-esque after winning it all.

Maybe Melky will return one day, just like Vasquez and Johnson.

Jee-bus, Gardner Gardner and more Gardner. Terrible.

Did this trade happen because of that Banter poll the other day? I voted SP and look what I got. No Melky for my coffee.

FWIW, Javy's stats in old YS
http://bbref.com/pi/shareit/DRRwp

note career BABIP of .243 in old YS ... meaning he was hit-lucky ...

[28] The Yankees pitching strategy: collect all of the Lucky™ pitchers?

[26] BA had him as #3, BP (article from today/yesterday) as #2

I like the pickup of Javy! Don't like giving up more prospects. And you gotta think this leads to a new LF. Though I'm ok with trying Gardner out. I'm not as down on him as others. I'll certainly miss Melky.

Just as long as they don't reacquire Ted Lilly and Jeff Weaver ...

on ESPN now...

[24] I don't believe what Feinsand was told for one minute.

Cashman is probably on the phone with Boras right now saying, "One year, eight million, with a club option for 2011. Take it or leave it."

The odds have greatly improved that Damon is coming back next year with Gardner as his caddy.

More Tyler Kepner tweeting:
Vazquez has 1 year, $11.5M left on contract. Again, Cashman's going for short-term deals to save up for dream free agent class next winter.

[22][26] Given how position-prospect poor the organization is, he is a significant addition. On the other hand, he is probably blocked by Cano and Jeter for several years. Losing A-Jax stings more, but they did (it is hoped) get good return for that investment.

It's funny; Sam Borden at LoHud says the trade relieves a "glut" of OFs then immediately says they'll get another OF. Which would create a new "glut", right?! Ah what the hell

[37]

Sounds more like Sam has a lot of glut-eus maximus ...

[31] Hey, we agree! I think Gardy will be less bad than some are expecting, and given a whole season, I think he'll even be respectable (esp. batting #9).

I still think that one more move is in the works.

I don't like this trade mostly for two emotional reasons:

I liked Melky. He was one of the young Yankees. I always saw him as more than a fourth outfielder, and looked forward to rooting for him the next 5-7 years.

I was at Game 7 of the 2004 ALCS. I know there are things to lilke about Javy (innings eater?), but Game 7 is pretty much all I remember about him. I'd never give up Melky's prime years to see Javy back in pinstripes, and for $11 million dollars. No thank you.

Cashman's weird winter waltz: one step forward (Granderson), two steps back (Nick & Javy).

[39] mark the date and time! :b

Yeah, I'm in the Melky we Hardly Knew Ye camp. Some regret here. I'm also way more cool than many with Gardner in left or centre (probably better centre, Grandy left). A strong fielding, so-so batting speed burner at #9 with our lineup ... that's fine, Banterers. Having said that, we are thin in OF now, lacking an established big league 4th OF, aren't we? Is DeRosa the International Next Signing of Mystery?

If Chapman's added it makes the deal a lot more sensible from Atlanta's point of view ... otherwise we're just fleecing them, I think.

I think the 5th starter is partly a training camp battle.It really has to be, no? Hughes actual cap for this year is as low as 140. (The guide/rule's 50 above the previous year, right?) Joba is ready to go 200, in theory. But is it unreasonable to expect one of them to be fairly clearly better than the other as a starter?

Melky being traded. Sounds like Juan Rivera all over again to me. Of course I thought trading Javy was an overreaction to the GS he gave up that year. Hope he has enough left or this is a "one trade too many" disaster.

Don't know why they would completely shut the door on Damon unless it's personal now or they fully intend to sign Holliday. Or... nah, I'm not gonna say it.

Melky has only 2 years of team control left, right folks? So if Melky breaks out this or next year he can be back soon enough (or would potentially be gone soon enough had he stayed).

[40] The thing is, Melky was never going to be part of the future, even if he stayed this year. Next season the Yankees will sign a stud corner OF FA (or they make big surprise splash this year). Swish is still under contract for two more season, correct? That means Melky is essentially a 4th OF until 2012. Given the way the personnel hs shaped up, the Yankees figured he was expendable.

So, how does this 11 million play into the fixed budget?

[35] [45] I sure hope you're all right. There's going to be a lot of breath-holding in April, that's for sure.

[45] You're probably right that Melky didn't have a future with the team, but I didn't see it that way. Going into this winter I thought they'd bring back Damon, or get Holliday. After they got Granderson, I figured they'd still get a big bat for LF, and that Mellky would start in RF, and Swish would DH. I would have been fine with that.
I'll admit, I thought AJax would replace Melky at some point, but I figured Melky's future would be in right or as a 4th OF, and if AJax didn't pan out, he'd be an affordable CF for years to come.

On third thought, Javy has to be a good bet to be a Type-A FA, certainly Type-B, next off season. And he's one that would likely decline arb. Resultant draft pick(s) takes some of the sting away from losing Arodys.

[25] It's not for good...just for this season that one will be in the bullpen.

[30] I didn't realize that BP had him that high, but I believe they were higher on him last year than most. Whether he is top-2 or top-10, the point remains valid. Arodys is a big part of this deal.

[38] nice

I'll miss Melky (except for the fact that he seemed to always swing at strike three in the dirt). I also liked Javy during his days as a Yankee and I'm glad he's back. The radio station I listen to at work carries the Braves games and therefore I got to/had to follow them a little this past year. Javy pitched pretty well for them down the stretch and I remember thinking it would be nice to have him back someday.

so what do folks know of logan?

[49] That's a very good point. Considering that Arodys is still only 19, the Yankees could wind up with a pick who not only has the same ceiling, but also is more advanced.

[53] Mattpatt will hate him

BP.COM Kevin Goldstein's top 10 Yankee talents age 25 or younger
1. Jesus Montero, C
2. Joba Chamberlain, RHP
3. Philip Hughes, RHP
4. Arodys Vizcaino, RHP
5. Melky Cabrera, OF
6. David Robertson, RHP
7. Manny Banuelos, LHP
8. Zach McAllister, RHP
9. Austin Romine, C
10. Gary Sanchez, C

[52] An erratic lefty who did have some promise. He is a bigger version of Mike Dunn. I think that part of the deal is a wash. This is Melky and Arodys for Javy (what great first names).

Even more Tyler Kepner (he's on fire today):
Yanks use 6 prospects to get Granderson and Vazquez, yet keep Hughes, Joba, Montero, Melancon, Romine, McAllister. Not bad.

QUICK POLL: is Logan a LOOGY improvement over Coke?

Coke looks a little better to me, but it's a smaller sample size and it's quasi-moot, since Coke was already gone.

My [54] should have replied to [52], my numbering is off because a comment with links is in moderation purgatory.

[57] I liked this one, by Kep:
Since Yanks traded Vazquez after 2004 ALCS, he has over 1000 innings and over 1000 strikeouts. Only other pitcher to do it: Johan Santana.

[58] Porbably close to a toss up, although I don't see Logan as anything close to a lock to make the 25-man.

I don't like this move one bit. This is a move to win a 105 games rather than 100. It's sheer decadence for the sake of insurance. And why give up anything when you could get a decent arm on the market and certainly for $11.5M. I mean, Sheets or Duck for $11.5M and Melky, Dunn, Vizcaino or Vazquez? It's not even close for me.

BTW: Melky is going to .800 OPS in the NL. I see Juan Rivera. A guy who was never critical but certainly helpful. And they gave him away for Javy Vazquez? At least the first time you could justify it as needing young pitching. Now, it's pure insurance where the Yankees already have young pitching.

Forget all the stats about Vazquez. He's a league average pitcher getting paid more than average. If something happens to one of Sabathia, Burnett, or Pettitte, he's a very nice fill-in. But then you could always make this trade for a similar arm when that happens.

Joel Sherman's tweets:
#Yankees project Vazquez as Type-A fr agt next winter so can offer arb and - if rejected - get 2 high picks to begin replenish system

# With Vazquez, #Yankees will try to save some $$ by trading Gaudin or Mitre to team seeking backend help before spring training ends

#Yanks felt could spend on SP or LF, and would rather be vulnerable in LF than rotation, so money on Vazquez not on LF

#Yankees insisting still that they will be under $200M payroll, which means bargain bin for LF if they hold firm

#Yankees figured Melky's arb was going to be $3M-$3.5M, so they see Vazquez as more $8-$8.5M starter than $11.5M

[63] But then you could always make this trade for a similar arm when that happens.

Perhaps, though at that point his value would be higher and so, presumably, the trade more costly.

This trade comes down to how much Melky and Arodys are worth more than how much Javy costs the Yankees in terms of dollars/roster flexibility.

[64] by trading Gaudin or Mitre to team

Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha...

Yankees figured Melky’s arb was going to be $3M-$3.5M, so they see Vazquez as more $8-$8.5M starter than $11.5M

Now that's interesting.

[63] League average pitchers who throw 200 innings are valuable and not easily/readily attainable. Javy is a huge upgrade over Mitre/Guadin, so the Yankees are improving. It's also not overkill because AJ and Andy are far from locks to get through another season without missing a start. If one were to go down, you'd be looking at two established starters, Joba and a Mitre and Gaudin (kind of like the days of Ponson and Rasner).

The Type A possibility mitigates the loss of Arodys, so this comes down to Melky versus Javy for 2009. Only my fondness for Melky stops be from thinking this was a slam dunk for the Yankees. Either way, it was a creative solution with little risk, of which Sheets or Duck have a lot.

[64] My only problem with the SP verus LF logic is if they had to make a choice, it probably would have made sense to not sign NJ and go for a player who could play the OF. Now, they have the DH spot locked up with no productive options for LF. I'd much rather go into 2010 with Miranda as the DH than Gardner as the LF'er.

I also didn't think they should have jettisoned Vasquez like that in the first place.

[7] There is a group of Melky supporters/Gardner haters, and I myself was once in the "Melky has far more potential/did you see Gardners swing?!?" group, but at this point, with Gardner (equal/better) SSS numbers, outstanding speed and defense, I can't believe the gulf between the 2 is that great. If Gardner can post a .700 OPS in CF, at $0.4m/yr, he will be hugely valuable.
Our current payroll DEMAND with have 8-10 guys for under $1m, who are 'good enough' to support our impact guys.

It's close: JD+Melky > Grandy + Gardy? Could go either way.

[12] I don't like losing Arodys Vizcaino, but the guy was in A ball. That's a LONG way off from helping the Yankees win games. Again... Cashman has been collecting arms, and we all KNEW most were trade bait.

Question: Is Javy, Phil and Joba the absolute BEST 4-5-6 in MLB?
Those 40% of our games count too... yes?

[16] THINK #28! I will miss the kid, dumb as he was.... but, it was just a matter of time. Gardner could have been the one to go, but at this point, shedding $3m counts. And really, we need Garnder's D and speed more then the difference in O.

[22] "...a super defensive outfield, Gardner in CF,Granderon in LF?"
That will be fun. Our OF D has been questionable for years.
REMEMBER: Theo the Genius went all Pitching and Defense. Even with Gardy, our Offense is much better then Boston's.

[23] Maybe about moving to California?

[25] I really wanted BOTH to be in the SR, but we did need depth as injury insurance. The saving Grace is Andy (and $11m) are gone next next.

"If the plan is to go with Gardner this deal becomes a net loss."
Really? Teamwise, you don't think: Javy+Gardner > Melky?

[27] We could get a "real #2" for Melky, Dunn and ARodys? Maybe we should have offered these 3 to the Sox for Lackey?

[34] Cashman is on the phone with Boras right now saying,
“1 year, $8, with a club option for 2011. Take it or leave it.”

I suggested this. If so, do we flip NJ?

[37] We had a glut of 4th OFers.

Anyone like taking a 1-year flier on Randy Winn in LF?

"Perhaps, though at that point his value would be higher and so, presumably, the trade more costly."

Not necessarily his arm. A similar, league-average arm. There are always a few available. Heck, Cliff Lee and Brandon Webb could be available.

"League average pitchers who throw 200 innings are valuable and not easily/readily attainable"

The Yanks didn't need that. They needed 100-150 league average innings. Now they'll waste one of Job or Hughes in the pen. And McAllister is almost ready . Funny that the Yanks were talking about acquiring Ohlendorf. Rotation depth, like bullpen depth, can be had cheaply if you trust in your young arms. At worst they'll be 20% below average, but with the offense and bullpen they'll win a nice chunk of those games.

The Type-A business is a red herring. Furthermore, if you're willing to let Joba or Hughes rot in the pen, why no package one, with Melky, Dunn, and Vizcaino, for Lee? It's a weird move because it's a move they didn't have to make.

[70] If so, do we flip NJ?

No way. Because JD would immediately become the LF (at least most of the time), so NJ would still be the primary DH. And why flip offensive depth...unless he could be flipped for a legit LF, of course (though I doubt that will happen).

[72] Yikes...he's 35 or 36, and have you seen his numbers the last couple of seasons? I'd rather take a flier on Nady.

[42] Phil pitched 110 innings in 2007. Also, this 'rule' in theory, applies to 23 yr olds and under, as there bodies are still developing. So Phil is getting to an age where it is not as critical. I read a statement by Cashman (FWIW) that Phil was good for 160-170 IP this year.

I like it less with A. Viz. in the deal. He's a baby who like all babies needs to develop his change but he has lightening in his arm. He's at least 3 years away but I think the Braves may have gotten themselves a good one there. IMO this is a useful and good trade for us in a number of things that it accomplishes but its not a steal in terms of the talent moved.

[76] Still, it's pretty clear that one of Joba/Hughes is destined for the BP, at which point it is not clear he'll be the #6 starter (we went through this last season). I'm really trying to make my peace with that.

[70] You can be a Melky supporter and not hate Gardner. I think.

Yup, don't like this move one bit. Unnecessary it is. They had plenty of depth to win 95-100 games. And they could have given the kids a chance to find their sea legs. Worst case they make this deal in June/July for another league average pitcher.

[79] One would think, but that seems to be a rare breed 'round these parts.

[72] Ugh. No. His defense is going downhill fast, and his ability to get on-base has always been too tied up in his batting average. Ideally, I think Gardner can play LF well enough, but the ideal situation would be to find a guy who hits lefties well and has some pop, and could play RF too. In fact, I would think this would be the perfect opening to bringing back not Damon but Nady on an incentive-laden, one year deal.

I'm sometimes too much of a prospect-lover - see my long-going on admiration for Montero, as h-c-e recalls - but I'm going to borrow from my dear friend Hoss right now and say, Arodys is but 19 years old. I think he's going to be awesome, but the baseball highway is littered with 19 year old pitching "prospects" who never made it. If Arodys makes it, good for him, but that's enough for me to say this was a bad deal. (Montero, being a hitter, is of course a lot more projectable and safe, which is why I was/remain so adamant about the Yanks not giving him up.)

I think william gets it right in [67]. And let us not forget that there is another young pitching prospect with a very cool first name that starts with an 'A', Aroldis Chapman, still available. If the Yanks were to sign him, I'm pretty much unconcerned with losing Arodys.

[70] [27] We could get a “real #2″ for Melky, Dunn and ARodys? Maybe we should have offered these 3 to the Sox for Lackey?

Uh, wiseass, I never said we could. I'm talking about Melky in a trade, not the other pieces.

[43] Rivera might be one of the better players that got away, but a career 107 OPS+ for an average fielding, average running LFer is not THAT great... maybe just a tad above average. Career .331 OBP. Over the last 3 years, he has averaged about a 102 OPS+

[78] Exactly. That's what annoys me even more. They showed last year that they weren't going to move Hughes back when they should have. I was looking forward both Joba and Phil working out of the rotation for the first two months. Somehow I think the Yanks would have won 50% of those games.

[79] I'm in that Melky Gardner fan club. They are both useful in their own ways.

[84] And never really a full-time player...lots of injuries. Between the two, NJ was the much bigger fish to get away.

[57] That post should be in BOLD. I think the baseball community will see this as a big Win for Cashman.

Can someone explain to me how this package for Vazquez isn't better than the package the Mariners sent for Lee?

I could well see the Yanks moving Gaudin - he's a useful swingman type pitcher, and then taking that money and signing Nady to an incentive-laden deal. They might have to use a little creative accounting to say the payroll is $200M, not $201M (eg, leaving Igawa out of the calculation), but they can get there.

[88] Speaking out of context, no. Melky+Dunn+Arodys > what the Mariners gave up for Lee.

But context matters, and its impossible to compare packages in a vacuum. The Phillies have no need for someone like Melky, who can play LF/CF well and even hit a bit. Meanwhile, the Braves desperately needed someone who can do those things. QED.

"Forget all the stats about Vazquez"
Someone more literate then myself must address this statement.

In the last 3 years as a Yankee, Pettitte has posted an average ERA+ of 104. He will be 38 in 2010. Is he an average pitcher NOW? Getting $11.5m?

Last year, in the crappy NL, Javy posted a 143 ERA+. But let's forget that. In the previous 3 years, in the AL, he averaged a 107 ERA+. He will be 33 in 2010.

[88] Tough to compare a two-team trade to a three-team trade.

[90] If they needed Melky so desperately, there was no reason to include Vizcaino.

[89] I'm not sure if creative accounting is relevant in this case. If the Yankees are tied to a budget (as they claim), it's a real budget (i.e., the money runs out a certain point). A phantom budget of creative accounting only matters for things like the team's luxury tax assessment, for which the difference between 200 and 201 is pretty marginal.

[68] So which LFer would you prefer, with a $5.5m budget?

[91] I'll eat my hat if he's better than league average next year. Besides, let's jump right to the point. Who trusts him in the post-season?

[92] That's a copout, especially since that part of the deal was between two teams. The Phillies essentially acquired Halladay then traded Lee.

[93] You're comparing apples and oranges. The Phillies sold low on Lee because they could not afford both him and Halladay (for whom they gave up a top prospect). Seattle benefited from the situation because they could offer the Phillies a few bits and pieces to help replenish their farm while, more importantly, taking over Lee's contract.

[72] In the last 4 years in the NL, Winn's average OPS+ was 92. Last year, it was 75. He's got a good last name... but that's it.

[96] Not a cop-out. See [97]. The Phillies had just added a big salary with Halladay (though defrayed partly by Toronto)--that changed the context for trading Lee. You can't view the two-team sub-trade outside of the larger trade.

Besides, let’s jump right to the point. Who trusts him in the post-season?

I do. Why not? Because he pitched poorly in Game 7 half a decade ago?

[79] Name 2.
(j/k)

OK, 100 comments....
OldPollTime
Rate this deal:
a) Start building a statue of Cashman
b) Good deal all things considered
c) A wash
d) Poor deal
e) I'm rooting for the Mets next season

They are not going to go with Gardner in the corner, just as they were never going to go with Melky in the corner. Those two are questionable in CF. No way does either one of them have the stick to play corner OFer.

Another deal will be done. I'd bet the farm on it.

[102] The Yankees farm?

; )

[103[ NO! We must keep Montero!!!!

[102] Nobody puts Gardner in a corner...

[101] b) Good deal all things considered (because I believe "all things considered" means he has an OF in the works)

[97] "You’re comparing apples and oranges."

You do know what those terms mean, right? In both cases it was a a pitcher for prospects. And the Yankees did give up more for less.

The Granderson trade was fantastic. This one is decidedly less so.

[102] Those two are questionable in CF. No way does either one of them have the stick to play corner OFer.

The paradox rears its ugly head again.

[102] I wouldn't be so sure. Granderson moves to LF. He's better than Damon out there too.

As for Vazquez in the post-season, who starts him above Burnett or Pettitte?

[108] I just can't imagine anyone moving Granderson to LF because they have Brett Garder or Melky Cabrera.

[110] Well, you don't need to worry about Melky any more. And Gardner is a plus player from his glove alone.

[106] I know exactly what they mean. You simply refuse to acknowledge that the contexts of teh two trades were different...very different. Fine.

Swisher and Brett can duke it out night-to-night to determine who bats in the 8-hole.

[112] Every context is different. Based on that logic no comparison can ever be made.

[114] But not every context is "very different." In this case, a three way deal (in which one of the teams added payroll by adding one pitcher, with the express purpose of ditching another pitcher, so as to sell low in terms of prospects) is too different to make a valid comparison with this particular two team deal.

To claim that Seattle gave up less for Lee is to ignore the very different context. Even if the statement is accurate (I don't know enough about the prospects involved) it is largely meaningless.

Try again.

Brian "Bubba Crosby is our starting CF" is not going into next season with Gary/Hoffy as the starting LF or CF. Of this I am not concerned.

[115] Congrats, you've resorted to semantics. And I'm not alone. You are.

[114] But . . . aw heck, its not worth it.

[93] Perhaps I was being a bit over-emphatic by saying the Braves needed Melky desperately. In any case, the Braves had a need for Melky, the Phillies did not, and that's why this package of players never would have been traded for Cliff Lee.

As for not needing to include Arodys - Vazquez got Cy Young votes last year (deservedly so), and is a very good-to-great starter. Melky's career triple slash line is .269/.331./385. Even with the Yanks taking on Vazquez's salary, that's not exactly equal in the Braves' eyes, is it?

"This is a significantly better return than what Philadelphia got for Cliff Lee, for instance."

- Dave Cameron, fangraphs - He likes the deal for both teams. I should be clear. It's not a bad deal for the Yankees. It was just an unnecessary one.

[116] Especially when one notices this (the last line of the Yanks' press release about the trade):

"The Yankees’ 40-man roster now stands at 37 players."

Lots of room to make more moves.

"Lots of room to make more moves."

I'm all for spending money. But spending money and trading prospects is generally a bad idea. Vizcaino didn't have to be moved. Send them Ivan Nova or sign Sheets or Duck. Melky wasn't special. But he was useful. And more useful than Hinske with more upside.

[117] Huh?

I'm not sure what that alone part is supposed to mean---I don't see tons of posts even bothering with the comparison one way or another. In any case, I don't give a rats ass.

You invoked the Lee-Halladay-prospects three way trade implicitly to criticize the Vasquez-Melky/prospects trade (i.e., the Yankees gave up too much). The criticism is flawed:

1. Trades should be evaluated primarily on their own merit. Maybe Seattle got away with one---bully for them. That does not mean the Yankees made bad trade (or a good trade) or gave up too much (or too little).

2. One has to consider the relative value of the prospects involved for both teams. The Yankees remain rich in pitching prospects (as you have noted before), so a low level prospect who is years from the majors may relatively little value to them even if he has a high ceiling (and thus relatively high value to other teams). It's clear that right now the Yankees value Hughes, Joba, Montero, and even Romine much more highly than they do some of teh other arms they have stockpiled in MiL.

3. The dynamics of a three way trade are very, different from the dynamics of a two way trade, making any such comparison difficult at best. Any criticism based on such a comparison is even more suspect.

4. We do not know all of the "insider" factors in the three way deal. Did Toronto mandate that the third team had to be outside of the AL East, for example? Did Lee have any sort of no trade clause? Either would have limited where the Phillies could have sent him, and thus dictated what they could have asked for in return.

There is really very little point in making the comparison that you raise, other than to try to make the Yankee-Atlanta deal worse by comparison...a deal that most everyone here seems to be ambivalent about or relatively positive towards. Then again, I haven't bothered to tally up all of the posts to see if you are "alone" or not, because such a matter would irrelevant to the merits of the case.

[101] i would put it somewhere between a and b. in fact, i'm shocked that anyone here is complaining. there is a possibility that vizcaino turns into an ace in 5 years, but that possibility is very low. and, in my opinion, this was a good time to trade melky, who will never be as good as some here seem to think he will. his swing is too loopy.

as for whether anyone trusts vazquez in the postseason, i find it truly absurd to hold game 7 of the 2004 alcs against him. for one thing, it was 5 years ago. for another, that was his worst full season as a starter. finally, he was put into an almost impossible situation by a manager who had already all but forfeited the series. it sucked that he gave up a grand slam on his first pitch, but he didn't put those runners on base. kevin brown did. i trust javy vazquez to competently start a game in the postseason.

i do worry about the joba and hughes situation, but as has been discussed here already, phil couldn't have started all year anyway. if i were girardi/cashman, i'd keep joba in the rotation all season (or until he pitches his way out, which he won't), and i'd make phil a 2 inning setup man. that way he should stay loose enough to be able to step into the rotation in case of any injuries, and should rack up enough innings to get into the starting rotation in 2011. i do still believe that the long-term plan is for him to start, but unlike many people here, i wouldn't be devastated if he stays in the bullpen.

I'll miss Melky, but I am pleased to have Javy back. To the end of his stint, I thought that he was coming into his own.

[119] It’s not a bad deal for the Yankees. It was just an unnecessary one.

Unnecessary...yes, I definitely agree with that. I too would have far preferred to go with Joba and Hughes in the rotation, with Gaudin and Ace as #6 and # 7, and worry about #8 later.

[101] I'm between b and c. It certainly helps the team this upcoming year (mainly because I think that Melky and Gardy are more or less a wash...those who prefer Melky will have a different view), and it would only hurt the team relatively far down the line. That said, I do agree with Paul (!!!) that the move seems like a bit of overkill...unless they really have conceded that Joba or Hughes will not turn into a starter. Insurance is one thing, adding a #3 type starter as insurance is a bit much.

And lastly, from an aesthetic standpoint, I would have preferred to see the Yankees at least make a go of reducing payroll slightly and keeping a few more homegrown players on the 25 man roster.

[122] For someone who doesn't give a rat's ass, you're spilling an awful lot of pixels. The Yanks gave up too much relative to market prices and especially since they could have had Sheets or Duck for the same money but without the prospects. An unnecessary deal and at the price required.

"as for whether anyone trusts vazquez in the postseason, i find it truly absurd to hold game 7 of the 2004 alcs against him."

It wasn't just that game. He's bombed in his other two starts as well. SSS yes. But he's the #4 if all are healthy. Hardly worth the upgrade. They were a 100 win team before this trade. They're a 100 win team now.

Paul - What are the odds that NEITHER Andy or AJ miss some serious time? I rate this as (B) A good deal, but a B+ in Terms of Cashman getting exactly what we needed (considering the price)... a consistant innings eater, healthy, slightly above average and capable of MAYBE being more.

I think this team needed a good 6 man rotation... considering the various issues with AJ, Andy, Joba and Phil.

I did like Melky. He is young and could still be better then he has shown. But that can be said about a lot of guys, including Gardner. What he HAS shown, is that he is a very-slightly-better-then-average CFer and a below average LFer.

The Melky Silver Lining:
... He should get consistant playing time in a weaker league, with far less pressure and not hearing trade rumors every other week. I'm sure he's bummed, but this will ultimately be better for his career.
... Maybe Cano will hang out more with ARod now. Amos and Andy is now just Andy.
... No more Melky/Brett debates. We can just wait a few years and see what happens.
... No more worring about seeing Melky get his face stepped on when he slides head-first into 1st base.
... Our team IQ jumps up about 6 points

"Insurance is one thing, adding a #3 type starter as insurance is a bit much"..especially at a #1 price.

[128] They had an eight-man rotation (without McAllister) and one that netted them 103 wins last year. And that was without using Hughes to best of his abilities. This trade hasn't changed anything.

Moreover, I was all for insurance...with Sheets or Duck. Save the prospects unless it's a no-brainer or you need mid-season help.

By the way, I say all this as a huge fan of the first Vazquez trade at the time. But he's now shown he's not consistent.

[129] i don't agree that that was a #1 price. That package does not get us a #1.

[127] For someone who doesn’t give a rat’s ass, you’re spilling an awful lot of pixels.

I don't give a rat's ass about being "alone", which you accused me of as if that was a valid measure of the merits of an argument.

My favorite about this trade is that it might, possibly, push Lucky™ back another spot in the depth chart. Maybe, depending on whether Job or Hughes is suddenly deemed irreplaceable in the 'pen.

If you asked me to make a list of people I neither expected nor wanted to see in a Yankee uniform ever again, Jome Run Javy Vazquez would have been somewhere near the top. And somehow we gave up Dunn (WooHoo!) but got a crappy LOOGY in return.

Still, its a lot better than some of the other options out there so I guess its a net positive.

They need to sign Damon now.

[127] short sample size, and a bad 2nd half of the season in which he might have been hurt. [and just to clarify, he only started one game (game 4 vs minnesota)- the other 2 appearances were both out of the bullpen behind kevin brown.] and 5 years ago.
also, you said earlier that this upgrades them from 100 to 105. now you think it does nothing, or are you saying they were a 100+ win team before and they still are? normally i would agree that a team projected to win 100 games should be fine, but please don't forget that boston has definitely upgraded their rotation, and could also be a 100 win team in 2010 (i personally doubt it with their offense, but it's possible).

[130] an 8 man rotation? cc, aj, pettitte, joba, phil*, gaudin**, mitre***, who? aceves?
*can't stay in the rotation all year
**kind of sucks
***really really sucks

[134] Wow, that was downright balanced and not entirely negative. You've come a long way! ; )

Ah, it wouldn't be winter or the holiday season if there was not a thoroughly dead horse being beaten to death, ad infinitum, at the Banter. NOW the season is really complete.

And on that note, Merry Christmas to all! See you folks in 2010, unless they sign Holliday or Bay or Damon over the next week+.

[135] mitre***, who? aceves?
*can’t stay in the rotation all year
**kind of sucks
***really really sucks

Correction:

***is very, very, very unlucky.

[132] Fair enough.

That package doesn't even get a #2, or in most cases, a reliable #3. I liked thinking about Arodys, but he is in A ball! Can't we just get Daniel Cabrera or Farnsworth? Throwing hard is great... but history is littered with hard throwers that never saw the light of MLB, no less having a real impact there.

It's fine to get attached to our players and their potential. That's a BIG part of being a fan. But if we want to play GM and judge Cashman, we need to put emotions aside.

After seeing Iggy, Mitre, Ponson and a long list of terrible SP stand-ins, I would think Vazquez would put a lot of minds at ease.

We are a WS bound team.
Should our #6 really be a reclaimation project or a Farm hand?
Can you name me a year we had too much Pitching?
Do the Sox have too much pitching?
But Paul, here's where I hope you are correct.
That we were a 100 win team going to a 105 Win team.
How many here think, pre-trade, we were a 100 Win team?

[135] It's about marginal wins. They already had those or could have gotten them more cheaply.

Goldman just ran though all of the options.

[133] i'd say that makes us very lucky today :}

[136] I think there are conditions that would have made this a terrible trade, and if I didn't think it was a decent trade, I would have really hated it.

[140] He showed power and control. At his age, that's pretty special. As for our #6, it's silly to say they need four or five solid starters every year. esp after 2009.

"How many here think, pre-trade, we were a 100 Win team?"

They won 103 games last year. That's the starting point. Even subtracting five for regression/age, they get at least two back with Granderson and NJ. Then consider that they had a 3.5 man rotation in 2009. The only question was whether the pitching would stay healthy. But that's always a question.

[138] i don't know how i made that mistake. but don't correct me you loner loser.

[141] what makes wins marginal?

[144] ok honestly now you aren't making any sense. you start by subtracting 5 games for regression/age. fair enough. 2 back for granderson and johnson? that's a 2 game improvement over damon/matsui? or are they a wash and you subtract 2 from the 5 game regression/age subtraction because they aren't old?
but here is the craziest part: "Then consider that they had a 3.5 man rotation in 2009." exactly! and you're the one arguing that we don't need more pitching depth? i don't understand.

[145] When they add little to the bottomline. This was a playoff team before this trade. This is a playoff team after this trade.

The late great Doug Pappas on marginal wins

Of course, that's assuming the pitching stays healthy. But we always have to assume the pitching stays healthy. And like in 2009, I'm afraid the Yankees wouldn't go back to Hughes/Joba in a time of need.

[146] The 3.5 man rotation just won them a world championship. And that was with mis-use of Hughes and Joba.

[143] OYF, as I said before (on another thread) I don't think of ANY team as 100-win team before the season starts. 100-win seasons are relatively rare and often involve a good bit of luck (in addition to talent, of course). Last year, for example: the team won 103 games but their Pyth Win Expectancy was only 95 wins. I was convinced that the '99 team was better than the '98 team on paper, but only won 98 games.

Given that, it definitely makes sense to try to improve, if possible, no matter how good you think your team is. No wins should be considered marginal before the season starts, IMO.

[121] I'm not a fan of Javy Vazquez at all. I hole him responsible for game seven. I didn't like his James Bond villian speech on the way out. He's been anything but consistent since he left.

But for the life of me I can't figure out why anyone would want Justin Duchscherer. The prospect of getting him is one of the reasons I don't really mind this.

"only won 98 games"

Surely you jest.

"But for the life of me I can’t figure out why anyone would want Justin Duchscherer."

Insurance = cash, plus you could put him in the bullpen.

[147] Of course, in that article, Pappas is discussing the ratio of marginal wins to marginal payroll, a ratio that is far more important to low revenue (or rather, low spending) clubs than it is to the Yankees.

[151] That's a hell of a lot of money to spend on a middle reliever.

It is very debatable whether what the Yankees traded to the Braves is better than the package that the Mariners sent to the Phillies. Regardless, the Phillies didn't need Melky. They have no room for him in their OF, so wouldn't pay him $3mn to sit on the bench.

As for this being an unnecessary trade, that is only true if you assume no Yankee starter will get injured and you figure that Hughes can hold down a rotation spot for the entire season. Both are very shaky assumptions, so Cashman was smart to bolster the rotation (and the bullpen as well). Just because the Yankees won 103 games last season doesn’t mean that’s their starting point for this season. If the Yankees didn’t acquire another starter, they’d be one injury away from a very weak rotation (even if you assume Joba finally clicks).

[148] why did you cite the shallow '09 rotation as a reason we'd win 100 games in 2010?

[147] "But we always have to assume the pitching stays healthy." this competes with your "Forget all the stats about Vazquez" ([63]) for most ridiculous statement on this thread. we always have to assume that the pitching does NOT stay healthy, especially when one of our top starters has an extensive history of injuries and another is 37 with a history of shoulder trouble.

[149] "Given that, it definitely makes sense to try to improve, if possible, no matter how good you think your team is. No wins should be considered marginal before the season starts, IMO." you are not alone!

[151] I jest not. They looked better on paper but did not replicate 118 wins, nor did they even win 100 games. Just like this year's team cannot be expected to replicate last year's 103 wins (especially given that last year's win total seems to have been a bit lucky-high). In a division with the Sox, I am not willing to assume that a 100 win team just became a 105 win team, nor am I willing to assume that improvements to the team are thus marginal.

[155] you are not alone!

No man is an island...

[155] elbow, not shoulder

[158] at this point it is both with andy

[157] you are so unlucky

to me this move is buying the insurance policy before the tornado hits your house.
it does complicate life for joba and/or hughes, but hopefully cashman will create a better roadmap than the one he had last year with those two.

it will be interesting to see what cashman has in store next. at the very least you can't say he has been sitting in barbados celebrating the serious with his phone off all winter

[159]

I think it goes without saying that the next move needs to be a left fielder.

[160] Not BUC? or utility IF?

[161] I'm guessing that was sarcastic?

[160] yeah i agree.
and sort of think it is going to be holliday - because i don't see cashman waiting for crawford next year (i don't think cashman will have crawford valued that highly) and preferring to go after lee, mauer, etc. caliber of fa in 2011

[162] You never know with me...I'm a lone wolf.

[154] "only true if ..."

Those weren't the only possibilities. I'd add:

- Needing 400 innings from six pitchers (Hughes, Joba, Aceves, Gaudin, mitre, and McAllister). That's seemed very reasonable and league average seemed to be the mean expectation. That's all they needed.

- Trading Melky et al for mid-season help.

[155] "why did you cite the shallow ‘09 rotation as a reason we’d win 100 games in 2010?"

Because the offense is still the best in baseball, the bullpen is very good, and the front three are among baseball's best.

[156] I mean the *only* 98 wins. That's an excellent team every year.

The more I think about, the more it seems as if Cashman will not be adding a LF, but will instead use a Gardner/Hoffmann platoon. Maybe they might go after DeRosa, but nothing more.

[166] :(

"At the very least you can’t say he has been sitting in barbados celebrating the serious with his phone off all winter."

Ah. The Michael Bloomberg Technique™...

[166] You might be right. I wonder how truthful the claims are that the team has a more or less fixed budget? There can't be much room left to add payroll, unless someone is traded (like Swisher, which would defeat the purpose of adding a LF).

Would DeRosa play for only 2 or 3 million? Is there anyone else available for that price? Nady? (I know, I know, you despise him...I'm just mulling options).

Cashman isn't setting up for something really kooky like trading Joba or Hughes?

Gardner in CF > Melky in CF, especially with a .345 OBP in the 9th slot.
Granderson in LF > Damon in LF, especially in Yankee Stadium 2.0

As for Hoffman, I think it will depend on how he looks in CF/LF during the spring to determine who of Grandy and Gardy he subs for.

[167] At some point, you run out of money. Aside from LF, this team has the potential to be well above average at every other spot in the starting lineup, rotation and bullpen. Maybe it's the residual joy of Winning the World Series, but I think the Yankees are in great shape. I already have my season ticket invoice all set for payment and can't wait for Opening Day.

[165] so you meant to say that despite the shallow rotation, the yankees were a 103 win team last year, so they will be that again this year. therefore it's stupid (marginal) to deepen the starting rotation? you must be kidding.

[167] Um... Gardner/Hoffman + DeRosa = bad egg nog?

The more you look at this offseason, the more you can see the workings of a plan. From broad strokes like Vazquez and Granderson to minor moves like Hoffman, all of the pieces fit so nicely.

[169] i would be shocked if joba or phil are traded. who would he trade them for? surely not a left fielder when there are 2 good ones on the free agent market and more in 2011.

[174] Well, that would be a first. I'm not sure I really see a plan, but if there is one, I'm glad we actually finally have one.

And I'm sure there's some sort of sedative I can take that will make watching Brett Gardner get 500 AB less painful.

[172] No. With a short rotation (and pitchers used poorly) they won a championship and 103 games. Pitching was not a primary problem. Another 100 innings from a Sheets or Duck was all the cover they needed.

It seems Cashman took away the wrong lesson from 2008-2009. This Yankees team, with an outstanding offense and a very good bullpen, can do fine with good enough pitching. And what they had in 2009 was much better than that.

[176] You really think the Yankees have been this successful for so long without a plan?

"some sort of sedative"

Watch him play defense, then watch him reach base.

[174] Yep. The Hoffman move was a head-scratcher way back when (or so it seemed), and now it all makes sense. The success or failure of the off-season will rest largely on how Granderson turns out, I think. If he goes back to being a big run producer and plays fine OF (whether Cf or LF is irrelevant), this off-season will have been a massive success. Moreover, so many of the subsequent moves have been based on his trade. It will be interesting.

[177] don't we have all 3 now? i mean, assuming either joba or phil is pen bound. We have a top notch rotation, a top notch offense, and a top notch bullpen.

[177] So, you are just ignoring the possibility of an injury for Pettitte or Burnett, all while assuming two chronically injured pitchers would contribute meaningfully?

The lesson Cashman seems to have learned is you do whatever you can to improve your team and not make too many assumptions based on last year.

[180] Granderson is going to mash, against lefties too. Look for a .875 OPS, 35 HRs, 100 runs, 100 RBIs. He's going to be really fun to watch.

[182] Did they ignore that possibility in 2009?

[175] I'm just playing with ideas. Who are the big stud LFs in 2011, besides Crawford?

[183] I hope he does. His trajectory over the last three years is not entirely promising, but we shall see.

[178] I think the Yankees say the word plan a lot. Does that count? 200 million dollar payrolls can make up for alot bizarre and pointless moves.

[183] Apparently they did because when Wang went down they didn't have a replacement. Thankfully, every offensive player picked up the slack.

[111] Don't get me wrong, I love Gardy. But I don't think he's a fit for corner OFer.

Seems like we went through this before. Bubba Crosby, IMO, had a better glove than Gardner. Perhaps not quite as much speed, but much better instincts. Some argued that with all the sluggers on the team, we could carry him even if he didn't hit.

But, well, it doesn't work that way. Especially with the Yankees. If you have a light hitter in a traditional power position, you're giving up some of the advantage you get from having expensive stars. And the Yanks are just not a team that values defense over hitting.

[186] If you can find that much fault with the way the Yankees rin things, I can't imagine what you would be like as a Met fan.

[177] what is the lesson you took from 2009? that you only need 3 starters to win the world series? that's a pretty dangerous proposition.

[179] Not gonna work. Tried that last year, and the entire second half of the year, when he didn't reach base, and the World Series, where he didn't reach base and somehow turned a Raul Ibanez fly ball into a double almost killed me.

[188] Crosby and Gardner do not have anywhere near the sample to make any kind of definitive conclusion about their defense based on stats.

Unless you think the Yankees are willing to spend as much money as it takes to get better, then sacrificing LF might not be a conscious decision as much as one born of necessity.

maybe cashman is looking to the "lesson" from 98-00: you don't need an everyday left fielder.

The Mets are close to signing right-hander R.A. Dickey to a minor league contract, according to the Associated Press.

[185] Comerica has been killing him and even against LHP. By contrast, he's going to kill YS 2.0.

[187] They frittered away Hughes' innings.

[190] That even with them not knowing how to develop young pitchers, they still won 103 games and a championship. With more innings available for Hughes and Joba there was less room for them to mess with them. Add-in Aceves, Gaudin, Mitre, and McAllister they had plenty of arms to give them .500 baseball.

[192] I know that. I base my assessment on watching them. Which may not be reliable, either, but hey, it works for me. :-)

I think the Yanks are going to sign Damon, or someone similar. LF is traditionally where you put the guy with the big bat who can't play defense. Having Gardy there would be a big disadvantage.

[189] I'm sure. But even they don't have a Sidney Ponson fetish.

But honestly, with the number of times over the last five years that we signed someone because they finally had a good year last year (Pavano, Wright, Farnsworth and so on and so forth) or signed someone for absolutely no reason (LaTroy Hawkins) or for the sake of signing someone (Kei Igawa) the sheer number of years people like Jose Veras took off my life as we kept on going with that experiment, giving 100 innings over two stints to Sidney Ponson and whatever it was they were doing last year with Joba, the Yankees just seem to do whatever they feel like at any given time.

[196] I have no problem with that, but as evidence, you linked to a statistical analysis.

[150] "I hole him" (snicker snicker)

Gardner can also get on-base. Crosby never could.

It's back to the paradox. Gardner is fine CF on a championship club. Granderson is an excellent LF. Both represent upgrades over 2009.