Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Thursday, December 27, 2007

Abraham: Yanks should say no thanks for Johan Santana

Yanks to go cold turkey on Santana? Big Boy Pete takes a look.

It’s their money, not ours. But I sit there at the Stadium and listen. People cheer loudest for the players who came up in pinstripes. People respect A-Rod but they love Jeter. They wanted Clemens do well. They adored Andy Pettitte.

Cashman has somehow made it cool for Yankee fans to care about Jose Tabata even though 99 percent of them have no idea what he looks like.

Spend the money on draft picks, Dominican shortstops and Taiwanese pitchers. Go find kids in Korea, Australia, Venezuela and everywhere else. Hire more scouts and go see every junior college prospect in Texas. Go find the next Santana, don’t trade for the old one.

Let Santana go to the Mets or the Angels or better yet, let him stay in Minnesota where he belongs. If the Red Sox were serious, they would have done the deal weeks ago. They’re pushing chips around the table hoping somebody in Tampa will go all in so they can fold.

We’ve spent two years wondering how good Phil Hughes could be. Let’s find out.

Repoz Posted: December 27, 2007 at 11:38 AM | 59 comment(s)
  Related News: GeneralMinnesotaNY Yankees

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 1 of 1 pages
   1. JRVJ (formerly Delta Socrates)  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 11:54 AM (#2654337)
I think Pete Abe is confusing the determination to keep the big 3 with some sort of wistful idea about the new, homegrown Yankees.

While I am leaning towards not trading anyone for Santana, I have no qualms or compulsions about the Yankees shelling out big bucks next year for Santana/Sabathia and Teixeira, what with at least $46.5MM coming off the books (Giambi, Mussina, Pavano, Farnsworth and Hawkins) and with up to an extra $32MM possibly coming off the Yankee books next year (Pettitte and Abreu).

If Santana/Sabathia and Teixeira become FAs after 2008, I expect all big revenue teams to go after them (obviously as appropriate - I don't think the BoSox would go after Teixeira), ponying up cold hard cash for them…
   2. Cowboy Popup  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 11:58 AM (#2654344)
We’ve spent two years wondering how good Phil Hughes could be. Let’s find out.

This is how I feel.

what with at least $46.5MM coming off the books (Giambi, Mussina, Pavano, Farnsworth and Hawkins) and with up to an extra $32MM possibly coming off the Yankee books next year (Pettitte and Abreu).

Wow, 78 mil to replace 30 mil (in this year's market) worth of talent (assuming Mussina, Giambi, Farnsworth and Pavano will all be useless by the end of the year, which I think is likely).
   3. pkb33  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 12:06 PM (#2654351)
It sure hurt the support of Paul O'Neil that he wasn't brought up through the Yankee system.

I hope the Yankees agree 100% with this article, btw. Of course, that's because I'm not a Yankee fan.
   4. JRVJ (formerly Delta Socrates)  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 12:20 PM (#2654372)
Cowboy Popup,

It's not so much that Giambi, Mussina, Farnsworth and Hawkins are useless, but that they will probably contribute at replacemente level (if that).

In case of the aforementioned 3 pitchers, the Yankees will arguably be in position to replace all of their productions in-house cheaply/much cheaper (or depending of how you look at things, Mussina will be replaced by Santana/Sabathia, though Moose is at the back-end of the Yankee rotation).

Pavano is dead to me.
   5. Cris E  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 12:21 PM (#2654376)
It's a silly argument on any number of levels, but the larger point of hanging on to Phil is still valid. I'd trade Hughes for Santana since I like certainty in my ace, but I certainly understand a fan wanting to like his guys that came up through the system. And I also admit that Hughes looks like a very rare talent. But I'd still make the trade.
   6. Tom Slick. I am a m******f***** (NJ)  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 12:23 PM (#2654377)
Re: 3 and 4

It's really not that hard to understand. If you're a homegrown guy new to the team and you make a mistake and/or suck, you will get the benefit of the doubt (for the most part), if you're not, you won't. Of course, if you are part of a "successful" team, then the love expands to everyone.
   7. The Answer to the TWolves (GMoney)  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 12:27 PM (#2654380)
We’ve spent two years wondering how good Phil Hughes could be. Let’s find out.


It's easy to say that now. But if Hughes starts slow this year and the Yankees are 5-10 games behind the Red Sox come July while Johan is pitching like normal for whichever team he pitches for I'd bet this guy writes an article blasting the Yankees for not trading Hughes. How Yankee prospects are overblown and should have gotten Johan when they could. That's the beauty of being a sportswriter is that when your wrong most likely nobody will remember. Where if your Cashman and your wrong it could cost you your job.
   8. aleskel  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 12:34 PM (#2654387)
How Yankee prospects are overblown

why do people keep saying this? How has the hype surrounding Hughes, Joba et al. been any different from the hype around, say, Buchholz, or Upton? Promising prospects are promising prospects no matter the team. And remember all the hype about Wang and Cano when they came up? Me neither.
   9. Dewey, Local Boy and Soupuss  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 12:51 PM (#2654412)
remember all the hype about Wang and Cano when they came up? Me neither.

I do.

Remember how D'Angelo Jimenez and Nick Johnson were going to tear up the league when they got called up?

It's not the fault of the Yankees, but prospects in the Yankee organization are going to get more attention, because they're in the Yankee organization. And yes, this is true of the Red Sox these days as well.
   10. SoSHially Unacceptable  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 12:51 PM (#2654414)
It's easy to say that now. But if Hughes starts slow this year and the Yankees are 5-10 games behind the Red Sox come July while Johan is pitching like normal for whichever team he pitches for I'd bet this guy writes an article blasting the Yankees for not trading Hughes. How Yankee prospects are overblown and should have gotten Johan when they could. That's the beauty of being a sportswriter is that when your wrong most likely nobody will remember. Where if your Cashman and your wrong it could cost you your job.


Similarly, if all that happens and Abraham doesn't write an article blasting the Yankees for not trading Hughes, no one will remember that you called him a hypocrite with no real evidence to support it. That's the beauty of an anonymous message board.
   11. Tom Slick. I am a m******f***** (NJ)  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 12:55 PM (#2654421)
I do.

Remember how D'Angelo Jimenez and Nick Johnson were going to tear up the league when they got called up?

It's not the fault of the Yankees, but prospects in the Yankee organization are going to get more attention, because they're in the Yankee organization. And yes, this is true of the Red Sox these days as well.


This is silly. Buccholz, Chamberlain, Hughes, Johnson, Jimenez, these guys are/were great prospects on their merits. What were publications like Baseball America supposed to do? Well, Nick Johnson just posted a .525 OBP, but we're going to ignore him since he's a Yankee...?
   12. pkb33  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 12:59 PM (#2654427)
It's really not that hard to understand. If you're a homegrown guy new to the team and you make a mistake and/or suck, you will get the benefit of the doubt (for the most part), if you're not, you won't.

That is not the point Abraham made, thus the responses. I agree with what you say, though...it's just a very different point.
   13. The Clarence Thomas of BTF (scott)  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 01:07 PM (#2654435)
Hughes and Chamberlain have gotten hella more respect than even Upton, and Buchholz was ignored at the start of the season despite good prior numbers.

####, Ian Kennedy got more respect than Buchholz.
   14. Cowboy Popup  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 01:09 PM (#2654439)
But if Hughes starts slow this year and the Yankees are 5-10 games behind the Red Sox come July while Johan is pitching like normal for whichever team he pitches for I'd bet this guy writes an article blasting the Yankees for not trading Hughes.

I will bet anything you want that Abraham does not write an article blasting the Yankees for not trading Hughes in July no matter what happens. Anything, you name it.

Remember how D'Angelo Jimenez and Nick Johnson were going to tear up the league when they got called up?

Remember how Jimenez got into a car accident and broke his neck and how Johnson has been a great hitter who can't stay on the field? Cano had almost zero hype and was generally thought of as being a near non-prospect because he could barely hit and couldn't field his position. As for Wang, I would love it if you could produce something that hyped him. I remember Gammons mentioning he threw gas back before he was an insider and almost nothing else. And are any of these guys any different from all the White Sox prospects who received so much hype and never amounted to anything? Jeremy Reed, Joe Crede, Joe Borchard and Jon Rauch all kind of suck.
   15. Cowboy Popup  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 01:10 PM (#2654440)
####, Ian Kennedy got more respect than Buchholz.

From who?
   16. Brian  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 01:12 PM (#2654441)
remember all the hype about Wang and Cano when they came up? Me neither.

I do.


I don't and I pay a lot of attention to the Yankees and their prospects. Wang got a little press early but that died down when he was injured. Cano, if anything, was undersold. Most mention of him was about his limitations.
   17. Cowboy Popup  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 01:15 PM (#2654444)
Wang sort of came in under the radar but I remember a lot of Cano-hyping here before he was brought up.

Yeah, we hyped him, no one else did.
   18. Dewey, Local Boy and Soupuss  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 01:19 PM (#2654455)
And are any of these guys any different from all the White Sox prospects who received so much hype and never amounted to anything? Jeremy Reed, Joe Crede, Joe Borchard and Jon Rauch all kind of suck.

I didn't say it wasn't true of the White Sox. In fact, the White Sox definitely have a recent history of prospects that are busts when they hit the majors. Ken Williams is more than happy to deal prospects for veterans.

But the Yankees definitely had a "pump and dump" thing going with prospects for a while. Remember Ed Yarnall? Ricky Ledee? Drew Henson? Not that I'd blame them - I'd do it too.
   19. Tom Slick. I am a m******f***** (NJ)  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 01:23 PM (#2654460)
Hughes and Chamberlain have gotten hella more respect than even Upton, and Buchholz was ignored at the start of the season despite good prior numbers.

1. You're going to have to define "respect."

2. Justin Upton has been great and looks to have a terrific future, but he is not in a separate class of prospect from Hughes and Chamberlain it would seem. What I mean by this is that after '06 everyone had Hughes ahead of Upton. Now, after '07 there is a sizable portion of people that say they would take Bruce over Upton and since Chamberlain is a consensus top 5 talent I think we can extrapolate that there isn't some chasm separating Joba and Upton.

3. Maybe if Baseball America hadn't been so busy ignoring Buchholz they would have ranked him higher than the 51st best prospect in baseball despite having like 20 innings above Low A ball. Hell, maybe Kevin Goldstein could have opened his eyes enough to rank him higher than 41st...

####, Ian Kennedy got more respect than Buchholz.

When has this ever been true? Was it last offseason when Buchholz made everyone's top prospect lists and Kennedy wasn't mentioned? Or was it this offseason when Kennedy is an afterthought on top prospect lists while Buccholz is leading them off?
   20. Tom Slick. I am a m******f***** (NJ)  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 01:25 PM (#2654466)
Wang sort of came in under the radar but I remember a lot of Cano-hyping here before he was brought up.

.280/.320/.400 while playing 1B.
   21. Tom Slick. I am a m******f***** (NJ)  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 01:29 PM (#2654474)
But the Yankees definitely had a "pump and dump" thing going with prospects for a while. Remember Ed Yarnall? Ricky Ledee? Drew Henson? Not that I'd blame them - I'd do it too.

Drew Henson was a consensus elite talent. Ed Yarnall was a highly regarded pitching prospect with the Mets before becoming a Yankee (and the Marlins are involved somehow, but the point is that he's not some Yankee prospect pixie dust creation). Ricky Ledee was a toolsy international signee that no one really mentioned until he spent two years posting OPS' in the .950 range at AA and AAA, are there occurrences where those types of players DON'T receive hype?
   22. Cowboy Popup  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 01:32 PM (#2654481)
Nevermind, I was wrong.
   23. Joe C and the Pop Culture Portmanteau  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 01:33 PM (#2654483)
Wang sort of came in under the radar but I remember a lot of Cano-hyping here before he was brought up.

.280/.320/.400 while playing 1B.


Oh, will you get over it already? Christ.
   24. Tom Slick. I am a m******f***** (NJ)  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 01:33 PM (#2654484)
EIOAJFEOIAFAW
   25. Cowboy Popup  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 01:34 PM (#2654485)
CP, thanks, my bad on that one.

No wait, I'm wrong. My bad.

Oh, will you get over it already? Christ.

No, someone doesn't get to post that there was a lot of Cano hyping without getting a response. You don't want to see that written again, tell your Sox fan friends to cut the bull about the revisionist history.
   26. Tom Slick. I am a m******f***** (NJ)  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 01:35 PM (#2654486)
Oh, will you get over it already? Christ

Well, we can also discuss how he's too fat/slow to play 2B and doesn't have the offensive ability to play 3B.
   27. Lassus  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 01:41 PM (#2654495)
We’ve spent two years wondering how good Phil Hughes could be. Let’s find out.

Mets fans suggest you instead turn to the Church.
   28. Joe C and the Pop Culture Portmanteau  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 01:45 PM (#2654502)
You don't want to see that written again, tell your Sox fan friends to cut the bull about the revisionist history.

Point taken, I agree with you that he wasn't hyped - maybe as a guy who could be a future regular, but certainly not as the multiple all-star he's turned in to - but can't you guys come up with at least one other example to use instead? It comes across as weird and obsessive the way you constantly refer to it, like you have to prove to everyone over and over that, no, seriously you guys, Cano is really good, and David Cameron is a big dumb jerk.

Then again, you guys have to put up with kevin comparing Ellsbury to Sizemore and Pedroia to Eddie Collins, so I guess I should let you have your fun :-)
   29. Joe C and the Pop Culture Portmanteau  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 01:47 PM (#2654506)
.280/.320/.400 while playing 1B.

Oh, will you get over it already? Christ.


David Cameron infamously posted on USS Mariner in, oh 2005, that Cano would never stick at 2B, and would never hit enough to play anywhere else, and was going to be a AAAA guy at best, etc, etc. Now it comes up any time Cano is discussed here.
   30. Cowboy Popup  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 01:51 PM (#2654515)
but can't you guys come up with at least one other example to use instead?

Well, I think Sickels called Cano something along the lines of a non-prospect, but then apologized for it, so the quote has been left alone and I would kinda feel bad digging it up and posting it. Looking at what Bpro had to say, they were surprisingly non-commital and said nothing about his defense other then that he was error prone.

I think, but this may be my skewed Yankee fanboy perception, that now that Cano is generally excepted as a star, even hear, the Cameron quote doesn't rear it's ugly head as often.
   31. SJ and the pants of freedom.  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 01:54 PM (#2654519)
David Cameron infamously posted on USS Mariner in, oh 2005, that Cano would never stick at 2B, and would never hit enough to play anywhere else, and was going to be a AAAA guy at best, etc, etc. Now it comes up any time Cano is discussed here.

It wasn't just that he said it, it was the manner in which he said it.
   32. TVerik. Whiz! Bang! Whimsy!  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 01:57 PM (#2654530)
I watched them when they were in AA - I remember that Dioner Navarro was the big hyped prospect and I had heard Cano's name before.

In the game I went to, Cano hit a homer and a really booming double, so I noticed him right away.
   33. SJ and the pants of freedom.  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 01:59 PM (#2654533)
Sickels was pretty fair to Cano in his original examination.

this was his famous "Eating Crow" post about Melky and Cano. He still may be right about Melky, but Cano is a star, and most people here would say that.
   34. TVerik. Whiz! Bang! Whimsy!  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 01:59 PM (#2654535)
They had a recent Yankees Classic on YES the other day, in which Michael Kay whined about Matsui not winning RoY. I remember that going on far longer than the Cameron quote.
   35. Cowboy Popup  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 01:59 PM (#2654536)
I remember that Dioner Navarro was the big hyped prospect

Oh good call, he was definately hyped up. I think this is the year he lives up to it, finally.
   36. SJ and the pants of freedom.  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 02:01 PM (#2654540)
Navarro received way more hype than Cano, Wang and Melky.

What I don't understand is how everyone whiffed on his defense.

Thanks to SG for the homework
   37. Cowboy Popup  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 02:02 PM (#2654542)
Sickels was pretty fair to Cano in his original examination.

Apparently he was, my mistake.

They had a recent Yankees Classic on YES the other day, in which Michael Kay whined about Matsui not winning RoY. I remember that going on far longer than the Cameron quote.

I think we go out of our way to bash Kay as much as possible everytime he comes up in a discussion.
   38. Socrates Brito's #1 Platonic Fan (1k5v3L)  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 02:07 PM (#2654557)
Sigh. We'll never hear the end of these "Cano Haters of the World, Suck It!" rants.
   39. Loren F.'s well-anchored glenoid  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 02:08 PM (#2654561)
While we're on the subject, Hensley "Bam-Bam" Muelens was also a can't-miss prospect. I think he was International League player of the year or something, and his minor league stats projected him to be at least a replacement-level major-league player; I don't know why he flamed out.
   40. SJ and the pants of freedom.  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 02:11 PM (#2654569)
He flamed out because he was never really that good.
   41. Brian  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 02:11 PM (#2654572)
Can I bring up Tony Solaita and call it finished?
   42. Valentine  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 02:12 PM (#2654574)
Just for kicks, let me throw out a hypothetical three-way deal (really a pair of deals).

Santana to the Yankees for Hughes, Cabrera, and Marquez.

Hughes and Cabrera to the Red Sox for Lester, Lowrie, Masterson, and Crisp.

In almost any three-way deal, SOMEBODY is getting shafted. Who is it in this case? (I'll keep my opinions to myself for now.) If you can identify which team pulls the short straw here, you can figure out the way this "should" play out.
   43. Joe C and the Pop Culture Portmanteau  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 02:20 PM (#2654585)
In almost any three-way deal, SOMEBODY is getting shafted. Who is it in this case? (I'll keep my opinions to myself for now.) If you can identify which team pulls the short straw here, you can figure out the way this "should" play out.

Uh, the Red Sox?
   44. Valentine  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 02:20 PM (#2654586)
Kevin, this deal doesn't require the Red Sox and Yankees to deal directly. It could be executed as two separate deals by the Twins. (Though the Yankees might be upset, they can't block it.)

Besides, I meant it as a hypothetical to make a point -- not as a serious proposal.
   45. Oriole Tragic is totally awesome in the postseason  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 02:28 PM (#2654598)
Sickels graded Phil Hughes as a B prospect around the same time he was dissing Cano. Nobody's pissed about that?
   46. Brian  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 02:29 PM (#2654603)
Twins
   47. Pops Freshenmeyer  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 02:34 PM (#2654613)
Sickels graded Phil Hughes as a B prospect around the same time he was dissing Cano. Nobody's pissed about that?

Sickels doesn't like to be too optimistic about players in the low minors and Hughes had just finished up in A+. He may be overly pessimistic on some of these players but he is consistent.
   48. Tom Slick. I am a m******f***** (NJ)  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 02:36 PM (#2654614)
Sickels graded Phil Hughes as a B prospect around the same time he was dissing Cano. Nobody's pissed about that?

Given the information available, a B was perfectly acceptable for Hughes.
   49. Jolly Old St. Neck Wound, Marching Through Georgia  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 02:44 PM (#2654627)
It's easy to say that now. But if Hughes starts slow this year and the Yankees are 5-10 games behind the Red Sox come July while Johan is pitching like normal for whichever team he pitches for I'd bet this guy writes an article blasting the Yankees for not trading Hughes. How Yankee prospects are overblown and should have gotten Johan when they could. That's the beauty of being a sportswriter is that when your wrong most likely nobody will remember. Where if your Cashman and your wrong it could cost you your job.

Similarly, if all that happens and Abraham doesn't write an article blasting the Yankees for not trading Hughes, no one will remember that you called him a hypocrite with no real evidence to support it. That's the beauty of an anonymous message board.


-------------------------------

I will bet anything you want that Abraham does not write an article blasting the Yankees for not trading Hughes in July no matter what happens. Anything, you name it.

Here I go out to the supermarket and when I get back I find that my thoughts have been plagiarized by two different people. But Cowboy: I want half your action.

The Red Sox and yankees will never enter into any substantive deal with one another for fear of coming out on the short end and never having to hear the end of it.

Hell, they're still talking about Sparky Lyle.


Hell, Kevin, just imagine what your early childhood mental state might've been if they'd gone through with that Williams for Dimaggio trade---in 1949!
   50. BeanoCook  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 03:32 PM (#2654677)
Sickels graded Phil Hughes as a B prospect around the same time he was dissing Cano. Nobody's pissed about that?


Almost 3 years ago. In fact, after a 2007 sneak preview, Hughes would be lucky to be the next Ben Sheets. B seems about right.
   51. 洋基's Biggest Fan!  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 03:44 PM (#2654692)
Hughes would be lucky to be the next Ben Sheets. B seems about right.

Even with his hamstring injury and a mid-season call up, Hughes seemed like he pitched more innings this year than Sheets has in his entire career. Sarcasm intended.
   52. AJM  Posted: December 27, 2007 at 10:56 PM (#2654959)
I will bet anything you want that Abraham does not write an article blasting the Yankees for not trading Hughes in July no matter what happens. Anything, you name it.

$10,000*

*Note: Bet not valid if I lose.
Page 1 of 1 pages

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

<< Back to main

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Guts
for his generous support.

My Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Vivid Seats is a sports ticket broker, concert ticket broker and theater ticket broker offering the best baseball tickets like Yankees tickets, Cubs tickets, and Red Sox tickets, as well as Police reunion tour tickets and Jersey Boys tickets.

We have baseball tickets, the NFL schedule, college football tickets and Cowboys tickets. We have NBA tickets like Celtics tickets and Lakers tickets. Plus, buy concert tickets, Patriots tickets and Colts tickets. Also check out our MLB baseball schedule

Baseball Bats

JustGreatTickets.com provides the best value for Chicago Cubs Tickets, MLB tickets including Red Sox Tickets, Yankees Tickets, SF Giants Tickets, LA Dodgers Tickets, Cleveland Indians Tickets. Get the best concert tickets like Jonas Brothers tickets and more Chicago Tickets.

Concerts Theatre NFL Angels Dodgers MLB Celtics Theater NBA Tickets Venues NHL Lakers Tickets NFL Yankees NHL Phillies NBA Wicked Marlins MLB Concerts Cubs Mets Red Sox Wicked WWE Red Sox Mets Yankees Dodgers

Major League Baseball: All Star Game, New York Yankees, Boston Red Sox, LA Angels, Washington Nationals, Chicago White Sox, and the Chicago Cubs.

Find terrific deals on Yankees tickets for the new home, Cubs tickets for classic Wrigley, or Red Sox tickets for Fenway with OnlineSeats. We have seats for every baseball game, including Dodgers tickets.

Alliance Tickets has cheap tickets available to all MLB games. We also have tickets to major concerts and theater events. Get tickets to the Colorado Rockies, the Seattle Mariners and all your favorite baseball teams. We also carry tickets to all the major Sporting Events.

Page rendered in 0.8664 seconds
82 querie(s) executed