On devils

By On November 9, 2011 · 5 Comments · In General Musings

Read and .

There have been and there will be a lot of things written about what strategies the Yankees should employ when signing free agents this offseason. To discuss this further, I’ll use a concept I’ve said a bunch of other times. There are two devils when it comes to contract negotiations: money and years. Teams can over pay, teams can over-commit, and teams can do both.

To say the most obvious thing in the history of obvious things, the Yankees should avoid to do both. However, if they have to give in to one, they should always give in to the money devil. The Yankees have cash…lots of it. They can afford to spend a bit more to lure a free agent to take a shorter deal. This is logical and I’m sure you’ll all agree.

As for the 2011-2012 Hot Stove Season, I think we’re finding the Yankees in a position where they may not have to give in on either. Generally, those devils are reserved for the big time free agents. This time, the Yankees aren’t really after any, are they? Sure, there’s C.J. Wilson, but the market on him hasn’t exactly heated up. For him, though, I’d totally submit to the money devil to save some years. I don’t love Wilson and I don’t despise him, but I wouldn’t want him for more than three years.

Then again, there is Yu Darvish. Darvish is going to require not only the money and years devil, but he also factors in the other two factors that must be weighed: upside and risk. Of all the free agent pitchers out there, Darvish has the best upside…but also the most risk. The Yankees are a team that can afford to take risks and while that doesn’t mean they should buy every lottery ticket out there, I happen to think Darvish is one risk worth taking.

As with everything in baseball, the Yankees have to strike an incredible balance. They’re in a strange position in that they don’t have many holes to fill and could probably stand relatively pat and do pretty damn well in 2012. But we all know that’s not going to happen and that’s a good thing. So I’ll leave it up to you: Whom would you splurge on? How much? How long?

Tagged with: •
 
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
Delicious Digg

5 Responses to On devils

  1. Joe says:
    November 9, 2011 at 10:20 am

    Why not Mark Buehrle on a 3 year deal? This guy is so consistent. Every year he has been a starter (since 2001) he has logged over 200 innings. I think he could really help in stabilizing the rotation while we wait for the B’s, and doesn’t make the yanks rush them up to the majors. He does give up the long ball a little much and gives up a good amount of hits. But this is a guy they could plug in there and not worry about, in my opinion.

    Reply
    • T.O. Chris says:
      November 9, 2011 at 8:11 pm

      I have rallied against the Buehrle multi-year signing since the end of the season. It simply makes no sense given this teams current needs in the rotation.

      First off The Yankees don’t need “another starter”. What they need is a number 2 starter. At this point in his career, in the AL East, Buehrle is no more than a number 4 starter. An extremely consistent number 4, but a number 4 none the less. If we had the top of the rotation sealed up, and needed consistent back end of the rotation innings he’d be perfect. But unfortunately we don’t.

      We already have plenty of arms that can provide innings in the 3-5 hole this year. Between Nova, Burnett, Hughes, Garcia, Colon, and Noesi/other rookies we can get 3-5 starter innings. But having 5-7 3-5′s doesn’t make up for the giant hole at the top of the rotation come playoff time.

      Buehrle also has terrible numbers at Yankee stadium career. Plus he is also going to be 33 years old when the season starts. This means by the end of a 3-4 year deal he will be 36-37 years old. I see no value in having a 36-37 year old Buehrle because we wanted someone to throw 200 innings of 4 starter ball in 2012. If anything this blocks guys like Banuelos and Betances from having a rotation spot in a year or two.

      If Buehrle wanted to play on a 1 year 14 million dollar deal, there would be no discussion. But he wants multiple years, and reports are he would be walking away from at least 2 years from the White Sox alone.

      We have rotation needs, this is true. We simply don’t have the need that Buehrle fills at this point in his career.

      Reply
  2. Thomas says:
    November 9, 2011 at 10:33 am

    I agree totally with your devils but I would add a third devil, that is a pitcher who has only pitched/successful in the national league!! If you go back over the last few years, it has not worked out for the Yankees.

    Reply
  3. Cris Pengiucci says:
    November 9, 2011 at 2:01 pm

    I’d splurge on Darvish and Cespedes. Keep the prospects and draft picks. Unless they can be had on very resonable deals, I’d avoid Wilson (3/45 at most), Jackson and Burhle and would also stay away from the trade market (Danks, perhaps Cain unless of he can be had at a reasonable price, such as Swisher and a lower-level prospect or a Nunez-type and only if the Yankees were convinced Cespedes could step in at the MLB level with solid production his first season. Also assuming he’s already been signed). I don’t think Burhle is interested/worth what he will receive from another team.

    Years and dollars become an issue. With Darvish, I’d assume a posting fee of ~40mil and a 6/60 contract. Not so sure what it would take to get Cespedes, possibly $5-$7mil/yr for 5 years? Again, not being a scout, if the Yankees scouts believe he’s MLB ready, I’d be in at that price.

    Reply
    • T.O. Chris says:
      November 9, 2011 at 8:17 pm

      I agree with most of what you have said. However I disagree on staying away from the trade market. I actually think if the Yankees make a big time move (outside of Darvish because I don’t consider Cespedes a big time move) it’s going to come via trade. I’m not a huge fan of Cain, for reasons I won’t get into here. But if a pitcher like Gio Gonzalez can be had at a price the Yankees like, that is the move we need to go for. This is the route I think Cashman wants go, and has proven successful for him in the past with guys like Granderson and Swisher.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Set your Twitter account name in your settings to use the TwitterBar Section.