I like Mike Silva. I had the chance to meet and chat with him at the Bloomberg event a few weeks back. I’m not against my fellow members of the Yankosphere for taking controversial stances or putting forth creative/new/wacky ideas. But we have to expect to be called out on them, when appropriate.
That said, Mike posted a doozy today, one that had my head spinning. Let’s start here:
The Twins could get a king’s ransom from the Yankees for Mauer. Think Hughes, Joba, and Montero as cornerstones of the package. If they are concerned about development timeline of Montero, then perhaps you could add Posada to the deal since he only has a year left on his contract. If the Red Sox come calling then the package could get even better.
Let’s ponder that for a moment. Hughes, Joba AND Montero, and that’s just the opening offer?!?!?! I’m speechless On what planet would Cashman ever do this? He balked dealing Hughes, IPK, Melky and whoknowswhoelse for Johan Santana, and you know Cash’s love of ace starting pitching. Why? Well, one reason was the “double dip cost”; huge hit to the farm system AND a huge financial committment. Well, the difference between then and now is that Hughes and Joba are integral parts of the major league club, no longer prospects. They are expected to contribute in significant ways, again. And Montero is merely the best catching prospect in the game today at the precocious age of 20. There’s room for him to grow, physically, mentally, emotionally and skill-wise behind the dish. The long term “value” for those three, given their costs, is astronomical.
Oh yeah, throw in Posada and his final year as a toss-in. Never mind that his own Yankee legacy, though not Jeterrific, is pretty damn impressive.
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.
I find this to be wackier than anything Silva proposed....ok, the Posada thing was kinda nutz.
Yankees fans have the same problem that fans of every team have, in that they tend to overvalue their own prospects. It's easy to project all sorts of great things on these players, but the fact remains that in this trade, the Yankees end up with (by far) the best player of the group.
That said, the only way the Twins trade Mauer at all is if they don't think they'll be able to re-sign him, and if Mauer makes the open market, the Yankees have a big advantage in signing him anyway. So they don't have a big incentive to trade away talent for a guy they would probably be able to get anyway.
It would be rather stupid to trade several players under control for far longer if they didn't end up with the best one.
That said, the only way the Twins trade Mauer at all is if they don't think they'll be able to re-sign him, and if Mauer makes the open market, the Yankees have a big advantage in signing him anyway. So they don't have a big incentive to trade away talent for a guy they would probably be able to get anyway.
Exactly. I certainly don't think the Yankees (or Twins) would make that trade for the reasons you list, but if they were interested, Hughes, Joba, and Montero sounds fair to me. Hughes and Joba are very talented, but they're hardly established stars, and Montero is very young and hasn't done anything at the ML level. The notion that the three of them are worth far more than Mauer, probably the best or second best player in baseball right now, is crazy IMO, regardless of salaries or service time.
Full disclosure, I am a Yankees fan. I think the flip side of your statement is that most fans of teams not involved in the proposed trade think that it will take a much larger package to get the star player than it ever does, particularly in the case of 1 year rentals. Now, I'm uncertain as to how much value Joba and Hughes have relative to your typical top 50 prospect, but it seems that most of the recent one year (or less) rentals have included at most one top prospect and some lower level prospects. While Mauer may be the best of those traded players, I think a package of Montero, Joba, and Hughes would exceed the hauls typically gotten in this sort of deal.
The difference is that the Twins want to keep Mauer, and haven't given up on him yet. Santana was going to go anyway, so the Twins have less bargaining power and less reason to want to trade him. The additional cost is a direct result of that difference.
It's the creation of incredibly stupid words like this that lead to this...
Why do people hate NYY fans
Well, as a Red Sox fan, I fully support this trade. I think it's a ridiculous overpay. You can't just wash away salaries and service time, as if they are irrelevant. One year plus the priviledge of paying a guy his market rate is just not that valueable, evan if the Guy is Joe Mauer, and there isn't a single other player wjo I'd rather have on my team.
The difference is that the Twins want to keep Mauer, and haven't given up on him yet. Santana was going to go anyway, so the Twins have less bargaining power and less reason to want to trade him. The additional cost is a direct result of that difference.
No this is completely irrelevant. When you have a commodity that all other 29 teams would love to have, you aren't going to be short-chnanged. Why would a team let a player they want go to another team for cupcakes, just because they think the dealing team is trading from a position of weakness. Teams wouldn't bidding against the Twins circumstances, they'd be bidding abainst other teams.
I did some digging on this awhile back, nothing particularly formal, just going through BBRef logs for big sluggers who have been traded recently (Cabrera, Teixeira x2, Thome, Ramirez, etc...) and 2-3 MLB/MLB-ready types was about the upper end of the deal. My recollection is that the deal that was looking the best was the package the Rangers got for Teixeira featured four guys who were in the Majors within a year and a half but even that should be tempered with the realization that Andrus and Feliz had never performed above Single A before the deal was made, they just advanced quickly.
The problem with these types of deals is that it is effectively impossible to get "fair value" in any meaningful sense. If you are trading a guy like Mauer or Adrian Gonzalez or Santana you are by default doing it from a place of weakness, no sane person would look to deal these players to improve their club. Because of that you are stuck having to take 75 cents on the dollar (if you are lucky).
I'm not a Yankees fan, but you're absolutely right. Mauer's trade value isn't radically different to that of Johan Santana. It's higher -- but not WAY higher. And the Twins got zero major league-quality players for him. Partially that's to do with their extremely poor evaluations of Carlos Gomez and Philip Humber, but still, I don't think even the Twins thought they were getting even one player with the potential to be as good as all three of the players the Yankees would be giving up might be.
I'm not washing away salaries and service time. I'm saying that those factors don't make the package of Joba, Hughes, and Montero far more valuable than Mauer.
I think the comparisons to the Santana trade are a bit of a red herring. The Santana trade was lousy from the Twins perspective -- even at the time it was made -- and probably at the very bottom of the range of talent received in a trade for a star player. The Teixeira, Cabrera, and Bedard trades are better comparisons.
Baseball is, ultimately, about the journey-- the Story along the way. When the season is over, no matter the result, you had fun on the way, and with a few exceptions no matter the ending nothing can diminish those games you had on the way. You can clutch to the best of times. Look at the Twins last year: of course it sucked that they lost to the Yankees, but the comeback to win the division is enough for most people. The 1951 Giants didn't win the World Series, but they are far more remembered than the Yankee team that beat them. The '75 Red Sox, to most, still means Fisk winning Game 6, not losing on Joe Morgan's bloop in Game 7. Josh Hamilton in the HR Derby. Etc. Etc. Etc. Can they be sore about eventually losing? Sure, but it was a helluva run, at least in retrospect. I read somewhere that there are two types of people in the world: "resolution" people who are concerned about how well they played and how they played, and "outcome" people who are only concerned with the final result- it doesn't matter how they played or why or who etc. In general, the fans of the 29 other teams (maybe 28, given the continued Yankeeization of the Red Sox) are "resolution" people.
Yankee Fans are "outcome" people. Yankee fans are focused only on the result. While they do occasionally grab hold of things like the Aaron Boone game and don't let go in a desperate attempt to forget Josh Beckett making Yankee Stadium his personal playground, it is usually victory or nothing. They could win 100 games and lose in a 7-game WS that ends with Albert Pujols going deep on Mariano Rivera in the tenth inning, and some would consider it the same as a 0-162 season (I'm only being half-sarcastic).
I'm just quoting this to ensure that people don't miss it.
This same statement was made about Halladay/Yankees. Mauer might be one of those cases where the only way to get him on your team while he is young is to overpay in a trade for him AND pay him close to market-rate on an extension.
Yep. Andrus and Feliz were essentially lottery tickets. Talented guys, but VERY young and unproven. In hindsight, with them both now on the verge of stardom, it's easy to think the Teixeira trade was a steal, but at the time, Saltalamacchia was the key to the deal, and he's done nothing but get hurt and suck with the bat so far.
Correct me if I am wrong, but all of those players had more than one season on their deals. Also, as I recall Cabrera was moved for two top talents, Teixeira had more top guys but they were assumed to be far from the majors, and the Bedard trade was instantly recognized as a vast overpay. I just dont see any deals being made with 3 in the majors/close to the majors talents very often.
All of that is true, but IMO Mauer is a much better player today than those guys were at the time of their trades.
Part of the problem here is the perceived value of Montero, Joba, and Hughes. Yankees fans of course think their combined value is astronomical. I see Joba and Hughes as talented guys who might be very good or might be mediocre and Montero as a great prospect who probably won't stick at C and is still very young. Taken together, they are very valuable trade chits, but I think their value is comparable to one year of Mauer, not some vast overpay.
I'm not sure about astronomical, but I think that if Joba and Hughes were both eligible for prospect lists, they would likely be pretty high (how many of the pitchers in the top 50 would you trade them for?). I just dont recall 3 guys that would likely be that highly ranked ever being traded in one deal. As was said above, you tend to get, at best .70 cents on the dollar in these moves. But as you said, my being a Yankee fan may be clouding my perception of their value a bit.
I just think this is fantasyland thinking. You're talking about two young pitchers who have already made the major leagues and the best prospect in baseball. Mauer is a better player than Bedard, but his difficulty staying on the field limits his value somewhat, especially as compared to durable sluggers with longer track records like Tex and Cabrera -- I think they're reasonably comparable. No single prospect as good as Jose Montero moved in any of those trades, let alone that plus two young pitchers with the kind of potential that Hughes and Chamberlain have.
I'm not a Yankees fan, by the way, so this isn't a case of me overvaluing my own team's prospects.
When did Jason Heyward get involved in this deal?
good point. But no single player as good as Mauer moved in any of those trades either.
First of all, the Jays got 3 guys in the BA top 85ish for Halladay. As for the assertion that Joba and Hughes would be Top 50 prospects - that's precisely the point, they are no longer prospects. Each has accumulated enough MLB innings to ruin that status and at the same time leave massive question marks about their futures. If players with their service time were allowed into the MLB Top 50 prospects, I'm actually fairly certain that they WOULDN'T be in there, so I'm not exactly sure what point you are trying to make. I would be exceedingly upset if all it took the Yankees to get the 2nd best player in baseball was Hughes, Chamberlain, and Montero, and I'm reminded of laughing my ass off that Yanks fans here didn't think Hughes OR Chamberlain + Montero was a fair deal for Halladay (who the Yankees needed much more than an offensive C). Any Yankees fan who doesn't want to give up this package for Joe Mauer should think about how they would feel if the Blue Jays acquired him for a package akin to Brett Cecil, Mark Rzepczynski, and Brett Wallace.
Disliking people because they don't have the same view as you? Assuming that all NYY fans think the same? Assuming that all non-NYY fans do too, but in a different way? I thought this place was for thinking fans.
I'm a yankee fan and I definitely overvalue homegrown talent. Other than the super can't miss studs, I don't even pay attention to prospects that aren't in the Yankees system. I don't even know who those players you mentioned are.
But I imagine if the they are on the same talent level and cost the same as Joba/Hughes/Montero, then trading them for Mauer would hurt the Jays' flexibility as much as this trade would hurt the Yankees. Didn't this offseason finally "prove" that the Yankees aren't working with a limitless payroll? Never got involved with Holliday, lowballed Damon, etc. Players that could help the team.
In 2011, the Yankees lineup would have Posada as an overpriced DH and backup catcher, Gardner still in LF, and 2 holes in the rotation (Pettitte and one half of joba/hughes) to fill. And a spot in the bullpen (or the 6th starter, if you will) w/r/t the other half of joba/hughes.
How do they fill those spots while still affording to resign Mo and Jeter? What kind of payroll could they expect? What kind of PR hit would they take for having that payroll? What are the chances that that negative PR affects the next CBA?
EDIT: Vaz is a free agent after this year too.
There was some rumor of Jon Lester going in one of the potential Red Sox deal, which if it was true then Bill Smith is probably shooting himself everyday that he didn't take (Jon Lester even strait up, would have been a steal WITHOUT considering the MONEY, he out WAR Santana in the ALE over the last 2 year)
Also, it's not a huge secret that teams, especially AL teams , no longer trade anyone they perceive as an franchise talent to the Yankees anymore, no matter what they claim to the contrary. there are various rationals behind this , though mostly it seems to be just the fear of fan base backlash .
So even if the Yankees DID over Hughes / Joba / Montero (which is already highly doubtful) you can raise the house that the Twins would opt to do anything else other than accept.
They held back on Holliday because of the long term commitment it would have costed, and they didn't lowball Damon.
Mo and Jeter at their current salaries brings payroll to 180m for 2011, which means they'd still have plenty of $ to spend on replacing Pettitte and Vazquez in the rotation, and/or address LF if they choose to. Filling 5th starter/bullpen roles shouldn't carry any monetary concerns, especially for the Yankees. Personally I'd expect a Lee, Beckett, or Webb type addition to the 2011 rotation, perhaps retaining Vazquez himself if he proves he can handle the AL.
Maybe not on an inning-by-inning basis, but Mauer is a catcher with a history of injury problems. I would say that that limits his value in trade fairly significantly.
Didn't the Jays specifically state that they would only trade Halladay to the Yankees (or Red Sox) for significantly more than the best other offer? I seem to remember AA doing so, but I could be wrong.
I don't think there are many people left who view Granderson as an on-the-field franchise talent.
What's the definition of a "franchise talent"? Players better than Granderson don't change hands too often, period.
Appeal to the peanut gallery: does anyone think this package and Hughes/Chamberlain/Montero are equivalent? In my viewing, Montero is more highly regarded than Wallace in prospect rankings (younger, tougher leagues, players a more challenging defensive position even if both may be ticketed for 1B), and Hughes/Chamberlain are similarly aged to the Jays duo, but with more impressive numbers (both at the minor league and MLB level), as well as stuff.
I didn't mean to be so literal, nor do I think the words "akin" and "equivalent" are all that synonymous, but I'll entertain. Montero is certainly higher regarded in prospect rankings, but Wallace is the more experienced, MLB-ready guy, which some teams value. As for Rzepczynski, maybe Joba had a stretch as impressive in 2008, but I don't think Hughes has ever pitched as well as Scrabble pitched in 2009. I included Cecil because I was looking for a Top 100 BA guy, but I could just as easily have said Marcum, whose stats compare favorably to both Yankee studs, or even somebody like Brandon Morrow. It's Joe freaking Mauer, a perennial MVP candidate - I wouldn't hesitate to give up any players that haven't established their upside yet, and quite possibly even a few of those.
umm, Hughes 09 > Rzepczynski 09 even if you discount Hughes's rates because he spent most of the time as a reliever.
Also, Scrabble is an excellent nickname.
You wouldn't trade Jim Mauer for Jose Montero straight-up?
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main