|
|
|
|
Baseball Primer Newsblog— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand
Friday, November 14, 2008
“Gangs are usually territorial and operate by creating an atmosphere of fear and intimidation in a community. They will have some form of leadership and a method of operation and recruitment.” (Federal Bureau of Investigation)
The latest Subway Series tussle could be over none other than CC Sabathia, the Daily News has learned, as the Mets Thursday apparently joined the Yankees in pursuit of baseball’s biggest free agent prize.
A high-placed Yankee source Thursday reacted to the development by saying: “The Mets are in it? Great. Bring it on.”
The Yankees are plotting a quick-strike offer to Sabathia that would meet or exceed the $137.5 million for six years that Johan Santana received from the Mets last winter.
Meanwhile, Omar Minaya was dicussing a trade for a pitcher with a GM but said he would first have to see how Sabathia’s free agency was progressing, a baseball executive said. A Mets official subsequently wouldn’t deny interest in Sabathia.
Repoz
Posted: November 14, 2008 at 12:36 PM | 75 comment(s)
Login to Bookmark
Tags:
mets,
rumors,
yankees
|
Bookmarks
You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.
Hot Topics
Newsblog: HP: Baseball is leaving the human factor behind (58 - 4:30am, May 26)Last: baudibNewsblog: Bud Selig -- No need for more MLB replay for now - ESPN (87 - 3:55am, May 26)Last: Athletic Supporter leads the nation in driftersNewsblog: OT: NBA Monthly Thread, May 2012 (1834 - 3:06am, May 26)Last: SpiveyNewsblog: Himrich’s Top Ten Target Field Foods (8 - 2:43am, May 26)Last: Long John McCaine Mutiny on the Bounty (scott)Newsblog: Boston.com: Curt Schilling’s 38 Studios lays off all staff (119 - 1:28am, May 26)Last: Swedish ChefNewsblog: T.R. Sullivan: Of Frank Robinson, Milt Pappas and Jim Palmer (8 - 12:40am, May 26)Last: The Gurus DO NOT BourbonSamuraiNewsblog: Wilmoth: Nate McLouth Designated For Assignment (12 - 12:25am, May 26)Last: TriponHall of Merit: Most Meritorious Player: 1973 Discussion (15 - 12:13am, May 26)Last: DanGNewsblog: The Hall of Very Good: Former Cards Slugger Critical of "LaRussa's Regime" (4 - 11:26pm, May 25)Last: cardsfanboyNewsblog: CSN to host ‘Phillies at the Beach’ on Memorial Day (18 - 11:25pm, May 25)Last: Fielder's the first baseman, Felder is the fielderHall of Merit: Most Meritorious Player: 1972 Ballot (28 - 11:25pm, May 25)Last: lieiamSox Therapy: A Winning Ballclub? (20 - 11:24pm, May 25)Last: DanNewsblog: Matschulat: Did I Miss The "Paul Konerko Is So Overrated OMG" Bandwagon? (27 - 11:16pm, May 25)Last: baudibNewsblog: TBO: Nerdy Rays head north (17 - 10:07pm, May 25)Last: PreservedFishNewsblog: Dodgers want to host NHL's Winter Classic (22 - 9:38pm, May 25)Last: Cris E
|
|
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.
1. Shooty: Applying to be Fearless LeaderI'd bet $100 this was Hank, but he's usually not anonymous. So...I'm going to guess Suzyn Waldman instead. Anyway, I really doubt the Mets will try to out bid the Yanks for Sabathia. Derek Lowe makes a lot of sense for the Mets, I think. Lowe, Orlando Hudson, a reliever or three and maybe a corner outfielder. Sorry if I'm stepping on Mets fans toes by jumping in here. I just love the freakin offseason. I look forward to it as much as I do Opening Day anymore.
The Mets don't have the budget for C.C.
You can stop fapping now, Hank.
The Red Sox need to make a big push.
I think he'll get more per year AND more years. CC is hitting the market at a perfect time.
Agree. As a Yankee fan in particular, I find that arguing over the offseason doings is generally more exciting than the games themselves.
How will a quick strike offer be any more effective? Do most clubs take a while in negotiations before putting an offer on the table?
In this case, the Yankees may spend more dollars than they need to, but marginally it makes more sense for them to seal the deal and move on to the next one.
Dave, why should it matter? He's going to get a deal that takes him to his mid-30s or beyond and he'll make gazillions of dollars. Well, gamillions, anyway. Multi-generational type millions. The "Shea-est" concern should be about 30th on his list of variables.
BTW, I like the adjective "Shea-est".
Hank: CC! We're offering you 6/140, but you have to take it or leave it this week. We're striking quick!
CC: (chewing) uh (swallowing) no.
Seriously, they might exceed Santana's contract? Truly they will brook no competition in their pursuit of Sabathia. I love the way hometown papers will just play stenographer to the silliest spin from their teams.
Moreover, the Mets can target a wider range of starting pitchers to fill the need they actually have, at a lower cost, while conserving their resources to fill other needs. Frankly, unless Sabathia decides for some reason to take a lower offer from Mets (like, he really wants to hit and so disdains the fake league with its fake rules), I see virtually no chance of this working out. And if it does, and as a result the Mets end up with same bullpen they ended 2008 with, I'm not going to like it anyway . . . . Give me a lower-priced (but quality) starter and an improved pen and I'll be happy. The Yankees can have Sabathia.
You know why? Because we're not in the business of beating the Yankees. We're in the business of competing with rivals in the National League. Blowing the whole off-season budget on Sabathia isn't the best way to do that.
Well said, but the vast, vast majority of baseball players don't seem to follow this credo. Vast.
Sam is right, of course. Sabathia over Perez and two top relievers, for instance, is not a choice the Mets can make, given the problems with their bullpen.
The Mets should take a hard look at Sheets right now. Nobody is talking about him because of his injury history, but I think the market will come back to him at some point. He's a very good pitcher when healthy, but has to be managed carefully. There are worse things. I wonder if a team that moves quickly on him might not get a deal if Sheets doesn't want to take the chance waiting on the market.
I assume the Yankees are willing to go (at least) as high as $25M a year for Sabathia. And that they will go at six years on the contract. That's a cool $150M.
If you don't think the Mets can get Lowe or Ollie or someone like that from the second-tier of FA starters, plus Fuentes and another reliever (picked up in trade or via free agency) for less than $25M/year -- and certainly for less than a total investment of $150M -- you aren't paying attention. That will be especially easy if the second reliever is a guy they acquire in a trade who is relatively cost-controlled, but even if it's a middling, but solid, FA acquisition it can work out.
You get Lowe and Fuentes for about $10-12M each for three years each. You acquire the another mid-arb reliever from a team looking for a bit of cost control, who is in the $2-3M range, and you've done your off-season work. Same overall cost per year as Sabathia, and a lot less overall than $150M.
Totally disagree. The fans will get over it. The Mets should be price enforcing with CC. Every extra dollar the Yankees spend on CC will make it more difficult for the Yankees to spend on other free agents in whom the Mets might be interested. And if it turns out that the Yankees' stance that they will exceed any offer is just bluster and the Mets can get CC for a price with which they are comfortable, even better. One of the things I like about Omar is that, unlike Steve Phillips and Jim Duquette, he doesn't play scared in the FA market.
I don't think that is the case here. The Mets would obviously want CC at a certain price. I think they should stay in it and make whatever offer they are comfortable with.
If we have Santana/Sabathia/Pelfrey, I'll live with Heilman or Ayala as our closer.
Not me. No way, no how. Einstein's definition of insanity: " “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." That bullpen would be even worse than the 2008 pen, because they won't have Wagner for even part of the year.
You know, we can dismiss the importance of a bullpen in the overall scheme of things all we want. But sorry, I'm jumping off that particular train. Maybe you don't need a "closer." Maybe the number of innings he pitches, high leverage or not, makes him demonstrably less important to a team than any starter or virtually any position player. Fine. But the bullpen as a whole? You will never, ever convince me after the last two seasons that building a quality, dependable bullpen is not an important task for a GM. Or, to be more precise, that if a GM knows that he has an undependable bullpen on a team that otherwise has designs on contending, that is simply an unacceptable state of affairs. A two-year track record of pure, unadulterated train wreck results demands a signifcant overhaul. Period.
If Minaya doesn't bring in relievers to change the expected results, he has failed this off-season. If he can do that AND sign Sabathia, fine. If signing Sabathia would preclude that, then Sabathia can just be the Yankees' ace for all I care.
I was going to say, "Ah, you say that now!", but Sam M.'s reply is more fun.
I'm willing to take that chance - (Sabathia - Perez) > (No Wagner balanced by regression).
Basically, I'm not sure that the 2009 bullpen would be that much worse than 2008, given expected regression for most of the bullpen arms.
Maybe you don't need a "closer." Maybe the number of innings he pitches, high leverage or not, makes him demonstrably less important to a team than any starter or virtually any position player. Fine. But the bullpen as a whole? You will never, ever convince me after the last two seasons that building a quality, dependable bullpen is not an important task for a GM. Or, to be more precise, that if a GM knows that he has an undependable bullpen on a team that otherwise has designs on contending, that is simply an unacceptable state of affairs. A two-year track record of pure, unadulterated train wreck results demands a signifcant overhaul. Period.
Fair enough, but Minaya should still be able to build a decent bullpen without spending that much. Let's say the Mets forgo an elite closer. They should still be able to spend an extra 5-8 million/year to add a decent bullpen arm. For example, Cruz or Affeldt. I'm willing to take a couple of tier B bullpen arms to add to a stellar rotation.
This is the Santana argument we had last year rehashed again. Yes, the Mets would make themselves weaker in other areas, but c'mon, elite starters are hard to come by.
Gak! The 2009 bullpen has to be much better than the 2008 bullpen. Or are you forgetting how torchilicious the 2008 pen was??? What kind of standard is it to argue that Minaya should forego a major shake-up of the pen because the 2009 version wouldn't be "that much worse"? Not that much worse? If the 2008 edition wasn't bad enough for you, I'd hate to know what you like in other areas of your life. Pain . . . brutal pain.
This is the Santana argument we had last year rehashed again. Yes, the Mets would make themselves weaker in other areas, but c'mon, elite starters are hard to come by.
Precisely. So when you have one of them already (Johan), and two other very good ones (Pelfrey and Maine), you don't want to waste their efforts. Minaya needs to leverage the 600 innings the Mets are likely to get from the quality starting pitchers already on the roster by building a reliably effective pen. That is more critical than trying to add the difference between Sabathia's 230 innings and Lowe's 200 innings.
Let's see: We won 89 games last year, despite a dreadful pen. I think Omar's goal should be to construct an ~95 win team. So if the Mets add Sabathia - along with Murphy for a full year - that should be sufficient to bump the team up to that level.
I'm not saying that the Mets shouldn't improve the pen; I'm at the front of the "Sign K-Rod or Fuentes" bloc. But if the Mets can reel in CC, then I think he takes priority over either closer, who I would sacrifice for an elite rotation.
We all agree that Omar can't have everything. But the prize is Sabathia, who I would rather have than K-Rod + Lowe.
Heck, if we can get CC, we can even make Pelfrey our closer. The possibilities of a Santana/Sabathia 1/2 are delicious, even if the chances are remote.
Maine to the bullpen? He doesn't have good enough command consistently enough for me. Does he have the type of arm for 60-70 appearances a year? I'm dubious. More fundamentally, to me the point of this off-season is not to leave question marks. It is to build a bullpen they can have have confidence in. Moving Maine is a question mark, not an exclamation point.
EDIT:
Rasky, the same is true with Pelfrey, but it goes double. Why would you want to take a young, stud starter on the rise and just move him to the pen??? Leave Mike Pelfrey alone. Keep it simple: we need some damn relievers . . . go get them.
I'm not saying that we should move Pelfrey. I'm saying that bringing in a second elite starter like Sabathia allows Manuel to do so if he chooses.
Not that the Mets are as strong, but the Braves of the Maddux/Glavine/Smoltz era could get away with a weak bullpen precisely because the rotation was so strong. I would advocate that as the best strategy to approach this offseason.
Agree with billy, - I go up to 7/160 for Sabathia. Let's get it done!
I'd match that. That's basically what the Mets gave Santana and Sabathia is just as good. I know having Santana lessens the need for an ace, but that doesn't mean that the money wouldn't be well spent on a pitcher of that caliber. If the Yankees want to blow away the field, they're going to have to do better than that.
But Johan being in the rotation already? I don't see how that affects the impact CC would have on the Mets at all.
and in a mets vs yanks value specifically, the Mets might have the edge b/c of cc's hitting.
talent is talent, and you get it where you can. If the mets can find cc's level of talent spread over other positions, fantastic. but i don't see why cc's talent would be valued less just because it mirrors johan's talent.
Because right now, the Mets are not maximizing the value of the talent they already have in the rotation. As I said, too many of the 600 IP they are apt to get from Johan, Pelfrey, and Maine are going to go to waste just as they did in 2008 because of the bullpen. Adding reliable relievers leverages THOSE innings into more wins, on a dollar-for-dollar basis, than the difference between Sabathia and the starter the Mets could get instead. Johan's seven quality innings don't translate into wins if Heilman/Ayala blows them in the 8th or 9th. And they don't translate into wins because C.C. pitches a great game the next day.
I'm not against adding a quality starter. The Mets need to do that. I'm saying that the additional wins you get from adding Sabathia instead of Lowe to the rotation isn't worth nearly the gain you'd get from adding the bullpen arms the Mets need more. If you can do both -- C.C. and the bullpen arms -- fine. But if the budget means it has to be one or the other, then the pen is a must if the arms already in the rotation are to be as valuable as they ought to be. It's about maximizing the value of the money they are already paying Johan, et al.
It took a while for Sam to get warmed up to Johan too...
If you call supporting the trade from the get-go "taking a while," then yes, it took me a while . . . ;-)
Perhaps, but trading Maine coming off shoulder surgery doesn't strike me as a way to maximize his value. But sure -- I wouldn't mind if Minaya did a bunch of due diligence on what he could get for any of his rotation starters as a way to deal with his bullpen needs while adding Sabathia. Personally, I doubt trading a relatively cheap pitcher like Maine (or a dirt cheap one like Niese) to make room for an ungodly expensive one like C.C. is going to work in terms of the budget, but I suppose that depends on whom you bring back in the trade, doesn't it?
According to the LA Times, it is not looking like Franciso Rodriguez is coming back to LAA. Moreno was quoted extensively and said "six" offers had been made at various times and sounded ready to move on.
Do people think this is just posturing? If FRod is on the market, who wants him the most?
Actually, with the inherent small sample sizes of relievers, wouldn't a bullpen be the one place where Einstien's definition doesn't hold (at least a little)?
With the Yankees so determined to have CC, his agent would be a fool to not have CC drive up the price as much as he can by playing both the "he wants to play on the west coast" and "he wants to hit" cards. I mean, how Hank hasn't telegraphed his willingness to overpay? I don't see $140/6 as blowing anyone out of the water; if Hank's going to outbid the field by 20% he's going to need a bigger checkbook.
And if CC really would rather play for the Dodgers or Angels, he can get extra money from them while still looking like a hero for taking "less" money to play with either of those teams.
That's true from CC's POV, but the Yankees' intended audience here might be potential rivals -- drive them away from even making an offer that Sabathia can play around with to drive up the price. Maybe this offer isn't quite big enough to do it, but then again maybe it is. We'll only know if/when we see another, competing offer comes along. But the idea, I think, was to pre-empt competition before it ever emerges, and by doing so prevent Sabathia from starting a bidding war.
I don't see Pelfrey as being the stud yet that some think he is--not with his K rate. I'd love him as a 4th starter on just about any team in the majors, but calling him a stud pitcher? It's early, very early, for that.
I'm sorry, but is everyone going to just let this stand? Derek Lowe is getting 3/30-36? Really? Who's not paying attention now?
Also, it's kind of cheating when you say Sabathia will cost the same as getting a starter and 2 top relievers and don't explain that you're planning to get one of those "top relievers" in a trade so that he's massively discounted.
Exactly.
Well, first of all, I don't think the Mets need two "top relievers." I think tney need one top reliever and one good solid one. Labels are silly anyway; what they need is 100-120 innings that can we can reliably project to be delivered competently in the late innings, so that the early innings pitched by Santana, et al, aren't wasted.
And second, it's not really cheating. It explains how the Mets can afford it, which is what I was asked. Taking advantage of baseball economics may be cheating in some sense, but that depends on whether you think the fact that teams get to underpay players in their first six seasons relative to their free market value is "cheating." Either way, I'm not the one who is doing it.
As for the closers, the Mets are quite wisely biding their time:
Other names mentioned include Hoffman and Wood, and possible trades for Jenks and Street.
But that was the question--how do they get 2 top relievers + one of the starters that you mentioned for less than Sabathia money. Your answer included unrealistic figures for a Lowe contract and a bit of misdirection by saying you'd trade for an artificially cheap guy.
The question wasn't how they could afford it. It was how was it going to cost less than CC. I think it goes without saying that in these discussions, you're talking about free agents. Because once you start talking about trading for guys a) you are ignoring the cost in talent that you're giving up (and the payroll cost to replace them); and b) it goes without saying that you could get just about any amount of talent for less than $25 million if you start talking about guys still under club control.
Long story short: it's not realistic to think that the Mets could use the money from CC to get a top starter and 2 top relievers on the open market. It's not even guaranteed that they'll be able to get 1 and 1 for that price.
I don't think that goes without saying at all. The point is how Omar can best work within his budgetary constraints to achieve his goals, and whether he can do so and acquire the SP and two relievers I think (and I believe HE thinks) the Mets need. Whether he gets those players via free agency or trade is completely irrelevant . . . except that the fact he might be able to trade for relatively cheap, pre-free agency assets and thus fit them within his budgetary constraints is an important consideration. Of course, it's true they have to give up talent, but it is entirely appropriate to ignore that cost in this context because the issue is the impact on the Mets' budget, not on their talent base.
As for the Lowe part, yeah, I was probably unrealistic on that one. But I'll be surprised if a pitcher his age can get a four year deal, and I would be worried if the Mets are the ones to give him one. 3/$45M. I think it's plausible the Mets could get Lowe and Fuentes combined for the annual cost the Yankees give C.C., and for many fewer years and WAY lower total cost. If Omar identifies a solid trade target for a reasonably priced reliever to add, then he's done his work.
Easily the best argument against Sabathia for the Mets is that he'll cost money they need to spend elsewhere. If they don't need to spend that money elsewhere, because they traded for a cost-controlled Huston Street or similar, then they definitely should go after Sabathia.
That would be true if all the Mets needed was a good reliever of the sort Omar might be able to acquire on the trade market. Unfortunately, that pitcher is the supplementary guy to the top-shelf reliever they ALSO need, who happens to be Job # 1 this off-season. It is essential from a business perspective as well as an on-field perspective to acquire a reliever with a consistent track record of success. Relievers are so unpredictable from year to year, the ones who perform well on a consistent basis are incredibly rare and hence very valuable. Given how bad the Mets' pen has been, and how costly their poor performance has been, it is worth it for the Mets to pay for someone who is relatively likely (based on past performance) to deliver. Fuentes and K-Rod have that track record; they give the Mets something the Mets need.
Put it this way: if they had a healthy Wagner, and needed a horse behind him, you'd be right. But they need Wagner and the horse he rode in on. That precludes Sabathia.
Problem with that, is that you're already over $50M on just CC and Tex. I don't see Burnett going for less than $15-18M, or Lowe for less the $13M. Those may all be underestimates.
I'm guessing the Yanks go CC, Burnett, and Pettitte, and hold payroll flat to a little down. The NY economy is really going to be tanking with the Wall Street meltdown.
Just to clarify here. You think the choices are
Sabathia and one good reliever
vs.
Perez/Lowe and two good relievers
I'm definitely in the former camp.
EDIT: Ok, I guess you were asserting a large gap in quality between the FA relievers and the trade options. I don't see it, on an initial look.
Well, the consistency of performance is the key for me. I don't see how the Mets trade for a relief pitcher who gives the extreme likelihood of quality performance that K-Rod or Fuentes offers, based on track record, unless it's Jenks. And I'm certainly all for seeing what it would take to acquire him. If the Mets were to acquire Jenks, there might be room for C.C. in 2009, but you still have to wonder about whether the budget would have room for Sabathia in the out-years, because Jenks is going to start getting much more expensive quickly.
I can't really get a handle, btw, on how much the Mets might be increasing payroll for 2009...
Brilliant! I love it--mind if I use that sometime Sam?
Best Regards
John
To flip the argument on its head, Sam is arguing that Omar would be foolish to let Sabathia prevent the Mets from signing Fuentes. To me, if signing Fuentes is going to prevent the Mets from signing Sabathia, then goodbye Mr. Fuentes.
BTW: The Mets should *not* block the OF with a veteran. Fernando is lighting up the Dominican Winter League so far, and Murphy is doing like-wise in the AFL. I really don't think Fernando is that far away.
Brilliant! I love it--mind if I use that sometime Sam?
Be my guest. But please God, let it be in reference to some other team's dam bullpen in 2009, and not Jerry Manuel's . . .
In the concrete sense, though, Sabathia is much better than Lowe + Fuentes. If that's where the budgetary options lie, I'd rather not have Fuentes.
You can't look at it that way, Rasky. You have to compare the difference between Sabathia and Lowe to the difference between Fuentes and the Mets' other options in the pen. And frankly, C.C. isn't that much better than Lowe, and given the Mets' bullpen, that difference is even less than meets the eye for the Mets. C.C.'s value, just like Santana's, goes somewhat to waste when a good number of his best starts go down the drain because the bullpen blows them.
Upgrading the bullpen, in a fundamental way, actually upgrades the rotation, because it means that rotation's value more often translates into actual wins in the standings. At least that is true when the relievers in question have been as bad as the Mets have been. Put simply, I am done with unreliable question marks, and I am not willing to give in to the CW among stat mavens that bullpens are so unpredictable that you should eschew spending big money on relievers because they're not that valuable and their performance isn't reliable enough anyway. To me, those very factors are the reason the few reliable ones are that much MORE valuable for their rarity.
Fuentes (or K-Rod) is (to the Mets) that much more valuable than Aaron Heilman, or Sanchez or Ayala or whomever. Pay the price to make sure the money Johan is getting isn't being flushed down the drain.
This is either a very bad way to use BBRef comps or a cautionary tale about all starting pitchers because every pitcher's comps paint a dreary picture. For example:
--CC Sabathia's list includes only one guy who won more than 86 games the rest of his career.
--Halladay's top 10 average only 33 wins for the remainder of their career.
--Tom Seaver's age 30 comps, despite including Clemens and Maddux, said he'd tack on another 91 wins and end up with 238.
Etc etc etc.
If CC accepts the Yankee offer, his agent will "earn" millions of dollars for doing nothing.
I hope like hell that the Yanks don't sign both CC and Tex, because the Yankee's first round pick would go to the Angels instead of the Brewers.
If the Mets bullpen is "torchilicious," then the Brewer bullpen is "Hindenburgilicious." Our current closer is either David Riske or Seth McClung.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main