Via Bryan Hoch, the Yankees have traded right-handed reliever, Edwar Ramirez, to the Texas Rangers for “cash considerations.” Edwar was recently designated for assignment in order to make room on the roster for Chan Ho Park. The slender 28-year old ends his disappointing New York tenure with a 5.22 ERA (ERA+ of 85) and 1.955 WHIP over 98 1/3 innings pitched (his K/9 of 10.6 was a bright spot).
Here’s Dave Cameron of FanGraphs, offering an “optimistic” outlook for Melky Cabrera’s 2010 prospects.
He’s been around long enough that its easy to forget that he’s just 25 years old. He gets labeled as a tweener, because he’s not a great defensive CF or a great offensive LF, but guys like this are often better than people realize, and there’s still upside left with Cabrera. He’s a really good contact hitter and strong enough to add to his current gap power levels. He doesn’t even have to add all that much power to turn himself into a legitimate 20-20 threat.
He may not look like a classic corner outfielder, but Cabrera can play, and I think Braves fans will be pleasantly surprised with what he offers. His defense is going to be a solid plus in a corner, and he’s not far from being a quintessential #2 hitter. Given his physical skills and age, don’t be surprised if he locks down an outfield spot in Atlanta for the next several years.
Like Cameron’s take above, CHONE is also high on the Yankees’ former center fielder. Sean Smith’s projection system forecasts Melky to hit .296/.367/.441 this season, a triple slash line well above his .269/.331/.385 career average. CHONE expects Melky’s walk percentage – 8.0% in 2009 – to increase from a season ago, nudging up to 9.3% in 2010, and his power to swell a bit, as well, with his career high ISO of .142 from ‘09 raising to .145 this year.
While the gains in walk percentage are possible, I doubt Melky will actually improve upon the power we witnessed in Yankee Stadium last season. His .153 ISO in Yankee Stadium seemed to be a product of the park itself – or an outright anomaly – rather than a development in player performance (his career ISO is .115). Plus, as a farmhand, Melky was rarely thought of as a prospect with much power. As Cameron says, he has upside, but it is limited. Before we begin casting Melky as a potential 20-20 player, I think we have to wait and see how he does in 2010 with Atlanta.
When you think about it, a corner outfielder with a great glove and the ability to hit 20 homers and steal 20 bases is a pretty valuable commodity. However, if such an outcome is Melky’s absolute ceiling, meaning that everything would have to go right in order for it to be reached, including him in a package for Javier Vazquez was really a no-brainer.
Photo by Nick Laham/Getty Images
Over the weekend, the Daily News’ Anthony McCarron analyzed the Yankees’ recent acquisition of starter Javier Vazquez. To the right of that text, in a sidebar titled “JAVIER VAZQUEZ, RHP,” McCarron briefly summarized his article, and outlined both “The Positives” and “The Negatives” pertaining to the team’s newly acquired strikeout specialist. One of the negatives — actually, the only negative listed by McCarron — seems flawed, however.
“Why has a guy so talented been on five teams,” asks McCarron, as Vazquez’s geographical fluidity — he has been traded five times over the last seven years — is the lone question mark, according to McCarron, that is tied to the Puerto Rican hurler. Apparently, if we are to cull some sort of significance from Vazquez’s lack of a steady home, then perhaps we are to believe that being traded five times in a seven-year period is indicative of a performative deviancy or personality problem. In some way, he must be defective. “He was a Yankee in 2004,” adds McCarron, “and they did not keep him at a time when they wanted to build around young aces, dealing him for Randy Johnson instead.” Again, the general willingness to trade Vazquez, despite his abundance of talents, must indicate the presence of an underlying (and significant) issue, right? Well, not exactly, as such a simple explanation completely avoids context and history.
With regards to the first trade Vazquez was a part of — from the Expos to the Yankees — in December 2003, daunted by a substantial set of rotational worries after losing David Wells, Andy Pettitte, and Roger Clemens, the Yankees decided to make a move for the 27-year old Vazquez after his most impressive season — 230 2/3 IP, 241 K, 3.31 FIP — with a struggling Montreal franchise. According to Tyler Kepner, at the time, Expos GM Omar Minaya did not want to trade the blossoming right-hander, however, the Expos were owned by the MLB and subsequently had “strict payroll limitations” which forced their hand. Therefore, the trade had little to do with Vazquez and had everything to do with the Yankees’ desires — they needed a pitcher and wanted to answer Boston’s trade for Arizona’s Curt Schilling — and Montreal’s organizational situation. This, then, explains one of the trades Vazquez was a part of (his first of five).
In the second trade Vazquez was involved in, after a disappointing debut with New York, the Yankees, and, specifically, owner George Steinbrenner, decided to deal Vazquez, sending him to the Diamondbacks in return for Randy Johnson, a pitcher that the sometimes irrational Mr. Steinbrenner had long coveted. Many reports note that Brian Cashman, aware of the deal’s long-term implications, never wanted to deal Vazquez for Johnson, but, fresh off of a stunning ALCS collapse to the rival Red Sox, the Boss pushed the deal through despite Cashman’s objections and the Yankees landed the Big Unit before the ink had dried on Vazquez’s extension. In that trade, again, there was nothing really wrong with Vazquez. Sure, his 2004 was a failure, however, the decision to move him was based primarily on an emotional reaction had by a fiery owner. Again, Brian Cashman, like Omar Minaya a year prior, wanted to keep Vazquez, yet both GMs were coerced into a deal. Thus, McCarron’s musings about the Yankees’ decision to include Vazquez in a package for Johnson and his thoughts about whether or not the move was as a red flag are hollow.
After returning to the National League and tossing 215 2/3 innings for Arizona in 2005, at the end of the season, Vazquez was once again traded—this time, to the White Sox. Fortunately for me, there is no long story to recount, nor is there any detailed context connected to the move. Basically, Vazquez requested the trade as he was unhappy living on the west coast. As stated by the man himself in September 2006, “Last year [the trade to Chicago] was my call, and I did that based on my family mostly.” Further demonstrating that Vazquez was traded due to geographical preferences — there was nothing wrong with him that brought on the move — the right-hander signed an extension with the ChiSox prior to the ’08 season and included in the extension was a limited no-trade clause allowing Vazquez to block trades to NL or AL West organizations. So, once again, it appears as though there is no genuine substance to the “he who is traded on multiple occasions, during a particular span of time, is automatically a problematic pitcher” theory.
The only time this theory was allowed any gravitas was in 2008, when the hotheaded Ozzie Guillen, Vazquez’s manager with Chicago, openly criticized the pitcher in September for his lack of aggressiveness and, with that, his lack of success in critical (big) games. After the regular season was over, the comments by Guillen seemed to take their toll — Vazquez’s ERA was ugly, too, which probably made him look bad, although his FIP was under 3.74 — as Vazquez was dealt for the fourth time in six years. He packed his bags and headed to Atlanta to pitch for the Braves, who, according to Jayson Stark, had been interested in the Puerto Rican pitcher for years. Thus far, this is the only instance where Vazquez was traded as a result of his own “doing,” although I wouldn’t put too much stock into the “big game” criticism, for it comes from a man (Guillen) who has had issues with just about everyone in Chicago. Nick Swisher is another example of a guy Guillen didn’t care for, and he seemed to fit in just fine once he landed in the Bronx.
Finally, in Vazquez’s most recent trade, the right-hander was shipped back to New York after one season in Atlanta. Again, though, the trade did not occur because of anything Vazquez did performance-wise and it certainly was not the result of a poor attitude or troublesome clubhouse demeanor. Instead, desperate to sign a bat or two this winter, the Braves decided to unload one of their more expensive starting pitchers and Vazquez was the only player they could actually trade. Prior to dealing Vazquez to the Yankees, for weeks, GM Frank Wren had attempted to find a trading partner for the much older and much more expensive Derek Lowe. However, there was little interest in the former Red Sox as his contract was prohibitive. This, then, forced Wren to deal Vazquez, who he truly would have liked to keep after the righty’s sensational season (interestingly, being forced to trade Vazquez appears to be a common theme in at least four of the five trades). Also, it is important to note the Vazquez was dealt back to the Yankees, a team that once traded him. If the club did not actually like Vazquez after 2004, I doubt they would have reacquired him for 2010.
In the end, the notion McCarron alludes to, that Vazquez might somehow be defective due to his transient history, is lacking in its legitimacy as four of the five trades the veteran was involved in were not brought on by his own performance, personality, or any other individual issue (according to published reports). Instead, as I have outlined above, organizational context was part and parcel to each trade and, in most cases, it appears as though the cited GMs were actually forced to deal Vazquez for one reason or another. Therefore, to think the starter’s trade-centric career path suggests an underlying concern is false. Vazquez, like any pitcher, has some issues — for example, his fly ball rate, which could be a problem in Yankee Stadium — however, his nomadic past is certainly not one of them.
Photo by Kevin Cox/Getty Images
UPDATE: (2:00 PM) (EJ) – MLB Trade Rumors has it. The Yankees will acquire Granderson for Ian Kennedy, Austin Jackson, and Phil Coke, pending a medical check. Full reactions later tonight.
UPDATE (12:06 pm) — From both Jon Heyman and Mark Feinsand, we’re hearing that the deal could still occur. Feinsand claims that the Tigers might be “caving on its price for Granderson,” and then states that the Yankees could find themselves in a position where one of their three pitchers rumored in the deal — Ian Kennedy, Michael Dunn, Phil Coke — would be downgraded. He speculates that Dunn would be the likeliest Yankee left out of the package (they would replace him with a lesser player).
11:58 am — In his latest, Buster Olney (ESPN) provides us with a quick update on the rumored three-way trade between the Tigers, Yankees, and the Diamondbacks which would send “Curtis Granderson to the Yanks, along with a prospect or two from the D’Backs. Arizona would obtain Edwin Jackson from the Tigers and Ian Kennedy from the Yankees. The Tigers would obtain Max Scherzer from the D’Backs and Austin Jackson, Phil Coke and Michael Dunn from the Yanks” (h/t to MLBTR). According to Olney, the “only way the threads of this would be picked up would be if one of the teams that disagreed with the proposal does a dramatic turnaround from its stance of Monday.” Based on what we’ve heard, including a tweet today from Jon Heyman (SI), the Yankees were the team that truly rejected the proposal based on the high prospect cost, which led to the current impasse in negotiations.
But, as Joel Sherman (NY Post) noted earlier, the stalled talks are likely just a part of the acquirement process. “It seems pretty clear that [the Yankees] want Granderson,” says Sherman, “and, generally, what the Yankees want they ultimately find a way to get.” He even goes as far as to say that the reports about the trade being dead exist merely to “downplay” the situation. We should learn more about the state of the deal throughout the day, so stay tuned.
According to George King (NY Post), a team interested in acquiring reliever Brian Bruney from the Yankees, was told that Bruney would be headed to Atlanta. I’m not really sure why the Braves would be interested in the frustrating righty — actually, two teams are interested in him if this report is correct — but I would be pleased to see Bruney shipped to another club instead of seeing the Yankees pay him anything after arbitration in 2010.
Photo by Jim McIsaac/Getty Images
The main issue at hand, at least from a financial perspective, with regards to a Roy Halladay trade is whether or not the 32-year old right-hander would require an extension upon being moved. Such a contingency would be extremely costly for a team, especially after parting with high-end prospects from one’s farm system. After witnessing the way in which the Johan Santana trade unfolded, most believe that Halladay would demand a new and expensive contract, although there have been reports stating that he is eager to test free agency. Based on a article today, however, in the NY Post, it seems as though extending Halladay is also a point of contention within the Yankees front office.
According to Joel Sherman, “one faction of the Yankees front office has advocated trying to trade for Halladay, but not extend his pact. That way they would get Halladay on a very good contract for 2010 ($16 million) and then offer him arbitration after the season to secure two draft picks as a way to recoup some of the prospects given up in the trade.” The merits of this idea are certainly worthy of consideration, as the Yankees would maintain some semblance of financial flexibility after the trade, and could theoretically replenish their organization’s development system by refusing to offer an extension and collecting compensatory draft picks once Halladay rejects an arbitration offer and signs elsewhere via free agency. The practicality of this particular plan is questionable, however, in that history tells us that Halladay would most likely demand a market value extension prior to being traded (especially from the Yankees).
Of course, in the Yankees “front office,” there are those who probably think such an extension is a good idea after giving up a tremendous group of prospects and young players — it’s the other “faction” — though, in my opinion, if I were forced to choose, I might be more inclined to agree with the group Sherman outlines rather than the latter.
What about you? Where do you stand on the extension issue?
Photo by Peter Thompson/National Post
Via MLBTR comes this piece from Jeremy Sandler of the National Post. In it, Sandler brings us a few tidbits regarding the Blue Jays’ asking price for their 32-year old ace, Roy Halladay. While most of what Sandler has to say isn’t at all surprising—for instance, stating that Toronto desires “young, salary-controlled players” in exchange for Halladay is like saying the sky is blue—one of his assertions is particularly notable in that it details what the Jays want from a trading partner, specifically.
According to Sandler, “[t]he Jays want a major league-ready arm and bat, both young and affordable enough to stay in Toronto a while, plus prospects for Halladay.” Sandler admits that a package of a “major league-ready arm and bat… plus prospects” for a player with only one year left on his contract is a “high price” for any team to pay. The human cost outlined here becomes even more substantial if an extension is also involved. Now, I could see certain teams parting with one or the other, a major league-ready arm or a major league-ready bat, while offering high-end prospects, but I doubt the Jays will get exactly what they want (an arm and a bat, plus prospects), despite Sandler’s claim that “[i]ndustry insiders suggest serious offers in the coming weeks should match Toronto’s wish list.” The Jays’ asking price just seems exorbitant, though you can’t fault them for trying (I’m sure the Twins asked for the same thing when trading Johan Santana).
With regards to the Yankees, I don’t think they could afford Halladay if Sandler is correct (which makes me wonder if he actually is, since most contending teams in need of a pitcher like Halladay won’t be able to meet Toronto’s criteria). Brian Cashman certainly has major league-ready arms to “spare,” with Joba Chamberlain and Phil Hughes, though major league-ready bats seem few and far between unless you believe that Jesus Montero and Austin Jackson are at that stage. According to Jon Heyman (SI), the Jays are said to like Montero, so perhaps they would be willing to take on a package of Joba, Montero, and other prospects, as Montero’s bat is often considered a “sure thing” (i.e., close to major league-ready). Still, as talented as Roy Halladay is, that’s an expensive price to pay for one year of his services (and, if an extension is needed, then the combined cost of a trade and a multimillion dollar contract is enormous).
In my opinion, such a trade could actually create gaping new holes rather than fill those that already exist.
Photo by Getty Images
From Mark Feinsand (Daily News):
Halladay wants out of Toronto, but it’s unlikely that he would waive his no-trade clause to be dealt to a team unless he was able to sign a long-term extension – something only a select few teams have the resources to do, most notably the Yankees and Red Sox.
It would likely take a bigger package for one of the division rivals to land Halladay, but if they have the opportunity to do so, the belief inside the Yankees organization is that it would be well worth it to pair the righthander with CC Sabathia atop a rotation that would then feature A.J. Burnett – who considers Halladay to be a mentor – as its No. 3 starter.
A source with knowledge of the Yankees’ thinking said the Bombers already have their sights set on signing either Halladay or Cliff Lee if both become free agents after next season. Yankees executives, however, fear that Lee might sign a long-term deal with the Phillies before becoming a free agent, leaving Halladay as the lone target for teams looking for an ace.
Brian Cashman has been hesitant to deal his top-notch prospects in recent years, but after seeing the difference a dominant starting pitcher such as Sabathia can make, ownership may force Cashman’s hand, sending away blue-chippers such as Jesus Montero and Austin Jackson in a package with either Phil Hughes or Joba Chamberlain.
This sounds awfully similar to the Santana sweepstakes in 2007.
I think we’ll have a similar result, too, with Halladay being traded to another team, not named the Yankees. When compared to the way in which the Yankees handled the Santana situation, I see no reason for the organization to operate any differently with Halladay. Halladay is currently a better pitcher, that much is true, but he’s also older and will cost more than what the Mets offered the Twins for Johan Santana. Perhaps it really is best to let Halladay go this winter while keeping one’s fingers crossed that he’ll be a free agent after the season is over.
Plus, I wouldn’t fret over the Red Sox acquiring him just yet (offensive upgrades are their main priority).
Photo by Stephen Dunn/Getty Images
From Joel Sherman (NY Post):
In a cost-cutting frame of mind, the Tigers have let teams now that Curtis Granderson could be had for the right package, an NL executive told The Post.Granderson would be attractive to many teams, with the Yankees near the top of the list. They have long searched for a premium solution in center since Bernie Williams left his prime, but now they also face the loss of the lefty power of free agents Johnny Damon and Hideki Matsui. Granderson hit a career-high 30 homers last year.
Brian Cashman met with Tigers GM Dave Dombrowski at the now-concluded GM Meetings, but it is not believed the two did any more than discuss needs and available players. However, the two have a good relationship and have done significant trades before, going back to when Dombrowski was in Florida and obtained Mike Lowell from the Yanks to the more recent Gary Sheffield deal and the swap of Kyle Farnsworth for Ivan Rodriguez.
The Yankees have a touted center field prospect in Austin Jackson, who could be the centerpiece for a deal, though Detroit would have a market outside of just The Bronx.
Granderson would be a nice fit for the Yankees. He had somewhat of a down year in 2009, despite hitting 30 home runs, but he wields a powerful bat, has a good glove, and possesses speed, stealing 20 bases. He’s also a media-friendly character, which would work well in New York. If the Yankees traded for him, I assume he would play center field with Melky Cabrera shifting over to left—this would be a significant defensive upgrade—to replace Johnny Damon (if he doesn’t return), although I wouldn’t be surprised if the Yankees then traded Melky and signed a new left fielder.
This season, Granderson hit .249/.327/.453 yet his BABIP was low at .276 (his career BABIP is .323). He’s owed $3.5 million in 2009, $5.5 million in 2010, $8.25 million in 2011, $10 million in 2012, and, in 2013, he has a $13 million club option with a $2 million buyout.
Photo by Ronald Martinez/Getty Images
