Seems like a bad deal for the Yanks considering the money involved for next year and the fact that Washburn isnt very good and most likely wont contribute positively in the postseason, but I guess they always have cash to spend and hes better than Sidney Ponson.

Finally, something that will cause the Yankees winning streak to end.

Eh, Washburn will keep the bullpen fresher than Ponson or Rasner. I'd actually prefer they bump Rasner than Ponson, Sir Sidney has pitched better.

I think that Washburn is worthy of at least a Pavano-sized chunk of cash for 2009. As I posted in the other thread, he's Yankee-young, left-handed, and good for about 200 IP of 100 ERA+ pitching per year. I can't imagine any situation in which he's not a good option for the back end of the 2009 rotation.

And, of course, he'd be immediate and worthy rotation help for this year.

As long as the Mariners are getting one of Freddie Sez's used spoons in return, there's nothing wrong with the Yankees picking up Kiefer Sutherland there. He's better than two guys currently in the rotation.

He's better than Ponson, but his ERA+ is 84 this year (after several years, granted, of 95 or more), he hasn't pitched 200 innings since 2003, and he's 33. Once a finesse pitcher's that age, an 84 ERA+ might not be sample size, it might be permanent.

He's better than Ponson, but his ERA+ is 84 this year (after several years, granted, of 95 or more), he hasn't pitched 200 innings since 2003, and he's 33. Once a finesse pitcher's that age, an 84 ERA+ might not be sample size, it might be permanent.

It isn't my money and it probably gets the Holloway Hacker off my favorite team, so I'm all for it. He just has to vaguely resemble decent.

This year, absolutely. I'd just be leery of extending him past 2009 (is that when his contract ends, or is that already tacking on a year?).

He's due somewhere under $10 million for 2009, and his contract is over then. I also would be leery of extending him longer.

Of course you don't extend him past 2009. Hell, depending upon how things develop, you see if you can't foist him on some NL team for a mid-range prospect (or even a lousy one) over the winter.

with the Yankees giving up only a minor league for Washburn

That's a hell of a trade, IMO.

He's better than Ponson, but his ERA+ is 84 this year (after several years, granted, of 95 or more), he hasn't pitched 200 innings since 2003, and he's 33. Once a finesse pitcher's that age, an 84 ERA+ might not be sample size, it might be permanent.

I'm not going to say he doesn't suck, but he has pitched over 177 innings the last three years.

Washburn has given up:

1 run in 3 starts
2 runs in 6 starts
3 runs in 4 starts
4 runs in 3 starts
6 runs in 1 start
7 runs in 1 start
9 runs in 1 start

For a fourth or fifth starter, that's just fine.

Of course you don't extend him past 2009. Hell, depending upon how things develop, you see if you can't foist him on some NL team for a mid-range prospect (or even a lousy one) over the winter.

Please don't give Bowden any ideas. (Of course, ideally he won't be working in Washington this winter.)

These are the trades that the comissioner needs to quash. It lets the Yankees upgrade for only money. There should be at least a B prospect heading back and Seattle should have to kick in some cash. Does anyone have any good ideas how to improve trades like this.

No. A slope like that gets awful slippery. I don't think the Commissioner should try to distinguish whether trades have "appropriate" on-field value. Heck, when I was running a fantasy league, I found it extremely uncomfortable to block a trade, even if it clearly had no merit.

If the Yankees are allowed to spend as much money as they want on free agents, they should also be able to spend as much money as they want on other team's players, thus benefitting the other team financially if not baseballically.

Of course, this isn't fair in our current system where there's a cartel that prevents other teams from taking some of the Yankees' fanbase. But it's better than the NBA.

If the Yankees are allowed to spend as much money as they want on free agents, they should also be able to spend as much money as they want on other team's players, thus benefitting the other team financially if not baseballically.

And let's take the Yankees out of it, for the purposes of discussion. We see teams in contention with money making "salary dump" trades all the time. Again, I don't think that we want some pencil-pushers weighing their evaluation of prospects and determining whether our teams - any of our teams - are able to upgrade themselves.

Of course, this isn't fair in our current system where there's a cartel that prevents other teams from taking some of the Yankees' fanbase. But it's better than the NBA.

Yeah, there's a cartel preventing me from rooting for another team.

WTF?

Yeah, there's a cartel preventing me from rooting for another team.

WTF?

The Arellano Felix brothers have your mother. They demand you root for the Yankees.

Yeah, there's a cartel preventing me from rooting for another team.

Really, Larry? This is the best response you can come up with? Why even bother?

It's funny that the trade of a player this inconsequential would bring out this kind of stuff.

Really, Larry? This is the best response you can come up with? Why even bother?

What the hell was he trying to say?

If you put an expansion team in NYC, they wouldn't do that well. The Mets did well because there were Giants and Dodgers fans who didn't want to root for the Yankees (or the Dodgers and Giants anymore). I don't see New York fans embracing a third team at all. I guess they'd generate more interest than the *really* small market teams, but they wouldn't have any discernible impact on the Yankees' and Mets' finances, I don't think.

but they wouldn't have any discernible impact on the Yankees' and Mets' finances, I don't think.

I disagree with this, sort of. If you put a team in North Jersey, I think it would do pretty well. There's a strange competition between Jersey and NYC; they've been squabbling over ownership of Ellis Island forever.

A surprising number of Jerseyites don't like to go to the Bronx or to Queens. I personally know ten or twelve people who would immediately buy season tickets if major league baseball came to Hackensack. Including Richard Pryor's character in Brewster's Millions.

I guess they'd generate more interest than the *really* small market teams, but they wouldn't have any discernible impact on the Yankees' and Mets' finances, I don't think.

Put a winner on the field and people will come.

I disagree with this, sort of. If you put a team in North Jersey, I think it would do pretty well. There's a strange competition between Jersey and NYC; they've been squabbling over ownership of Ellis Island forever.

A surprising number of Jerseyites don't like to go to the Bronx or to Queens. I personally know ten or twelve people who would immediately buy season tickets if major league baseball came to Hackensack. Including Richard Pryor's character in Brewster's Millions.

I have to disagree on a big league team in Jersey. I just don't think North Jersey would properly support an MLB franchise, even if there IS a healthy market to sustain it. North Jersey is pretty hardcore Yankees territory, with a smattering of Mets fans (myself included). As someone from Northern Jersey, please put a team in Brooklyn. They could easily support a franchise, and I think that it would immediately cut massively into the Mets' market share, at minimum. And, to really be effective, put a team in Manhattan. Those railyards need something to be built atop them. And the new New York franchise would immediately become a third major franchise, as opposed to a forgotten child.

But then, why would baseball want to destroy something so wonderful as having a perpetual competitor in the nation's most prominent city? I rather like it this way.

I personally know ten or twelve people who would immediately buy season tickets if major league baseball came to Hackensack.

They'd have more fans than the Marlins!

According to several sources, the Steinbrenner family has given GM Brian Cashman the financial green light to acquire lefty Jarrod Washburn from the Mariners, a move that is expected to be completed shortly.

While the Yankees won't part with high-level prospects, if the Mariners want something better than what the Yankees are willing to give, the Mariners are going to have to take Kei Igawa, who today was out-righted to Triple-A Scranton/Wilkes-Barre and is no longer on the 40-man roster. Igawa is in the second year of a five-year deal worth $20 million.
...
"Seattle is looking to dump money," an NL source said of the Mariners, who fired their GM, manager, released Richie Sexson (signed by the Yankees) and could be moving third baseman Adrian Beltre and left fielder Raul Ibanez before Thursday's trading deadline.

NY Post

I would be utterly stunned if the Mariners moved Beltre before the deadline. Unless someone gave them a king's ransom they'd be getting hosed.

If you put an expansion team in NYC, they wouldn't do that well. The Mets did well because there were Giants and Dodgers fans who didn't want to root for the Yankees (or the Dodgers and Giants anymore). I don't see New York fans embracing a third team at all. I guess they'd generate more interest than the *really* small market teams, but they wouldn't have any discernible impact on the Yankees' and Mets' finances, I don't think.

Short term, the effect would be small. Put a team in Brooklyn, have an ownership group willing and able to spend intelligently, and there would be an effect, as kids grew up splitting their allegiances. Add a fourth team in the general area, and while the Mets and Yankees would still be rich, they wouldn't be outclassing most of the teams in MLB in terms of revenue.

Short term, the effect would be small. Put a team in Brooklyn, have an ownership group willing and able to spend intelligently, and there would be an effect, as kids grew up splitting their allegiances. Add a fourth team in the general area, and while the Mets and Yankees would still be rich, they wouldn't be outclassing most of the teams in MLB in terms of revenue.

It would cost billions of dollars to start a team from scratch in NYC. New York is not giving an expansion team land for a ballpark, let alone a free ballpark -- they don't want an expansion team in New York. Maybe you'll get Jersey to build you a ballpark, but that's not going to have much effect on the Yankees or Mets, especially if they don't compete right away.

The third team might gain a solid fanbase, but it's never going to approach a third of the NY market. Considering the amount of money they'll have to spend just to get some attention in NY, they're not going to be turning a profit, and they'll be clamoring to move elsewhere in less than 15 years.

Putting more teams in New York is nice in theory, but the odds are so against it working that you'll never find anyone willing to take that risk.

I think it is pretty obvious from soccer that teams are in no way financially impaired by having nearby rivals.

This is pretty out there, but if the Dodgers moved back to Brooklyn you wouldn't have to worry about building up alliances from scratch; they would just steal a big chunk of kids of Dodgers fans currently rooting for the Mets. Didn't an ownership group from Brooklyn try to buy the team the last time they were on the market?

This is pretty out there, but if the Dodgers moved back to Brooklyn you wouldn't have to worry about building up alliances from scratch; they would just steal a big chunk of kids of Dodgers fans currently rooting for the Mets. Didn't an ownership group from Brooklyn try to buy the team the last time they were on the market?

It's not 1970. Those "kids" who are Mets fans are in their 30s or 40s. They're not dropping their team because their parents liked the Dodgers.

And Dodgers fans were a bit... bitter about that whole move.

Why are we even discussing a Dodger return to Brooklyn? It makes absolutely no sense. They've been in LA for over 50 years and are probably the best established West Coast franchise.

Is MLB's next effort to imitate the NFL going to be to make sure that no team is located in the US's second largest city? Send one team back to their original city and the other to the midwest? Say hello to the Brooklyn Dodgers and the Indianapolis Angels?

Maybe the Dodgers can get Frank Gehry to Design them a new ballpark.

And, to really be effective, put a team in Manhattan.

Ugh. I'm all for more competition, but Manhattan does not need more traffic.

And, to really be effective, put a team in Manhattan. Those railyards need something to be built atop them.

Yeah, they're building a bunch of office and residential towers. Tishman Speyer might have bailed on the project, but I believe the Related Companies (maybe it was Vornado) have stepped in. And putting a baseball team in Manhattan would be a total disaster.