Regardless of age, I'm more confident that tanaka will underachive on his deal than Cano, but maybe that's just me.
If high end pitchers were on the market, they'd go after them. They really need pitching, pitching is harder to find, Tanaka clearly has talent, and is very young. Clearly the Yankees think there is a very good chance that they will get good production for the length of the deal. And again, I don't think it was ever a case of Cano or Tanaka. They would have been thrilled to have Cano and Tanaka.E5 Yaz said:So they spend the money instead on a guy who hasn't thrown a single pitch in the major leagues, and they "know" only through video, scouting and a face-to-face or two?
I agree with your point about Cano, but they're doing the exact opposite by signing an unknown quantity.
EvilEmpire said:Cano is a lot older and they know him better than we do. Your argument would have been the same one they could have made to themselves (and maybe did) with the last ARod extension. For all we know, they think Cano is a lock for the next four year of high end production and were willing to accept risk for the last 3 years of a 7 year deal, but not 6 on a 10 year deal.
The Yankees have always been willing to spend money for talent and production, but that doesn't mean they want to be paying years and years of dead money. For whatever reason, they thought the risk of that with Cano was too high.
EvilEmpire said:They would have been thrilled to have Cano and Tanaka.
EvilEmpire said:If high end pitchers were on the market, they'd go after them. They really need pitching, pitching is harder to find, Tanaka clearly has talent, and is very young. Clearly the Yankees think there is a very good chance that they will get good production for the length of the deal.
StuckOnYouk said:Regardless of age, I'm more confident that tanaka will underachive on his deal than Cano, but maybe that's just me.
Well, the other contracts aren't exactly good, but the Cano contract is a nightmare. They were right not to match that, no matter what. Over-spending on some contracts isn't a reason to go completely nuts on another.jon abbey said:
While still managing to let their best player go elsewhere, don't forget.
Brickowski said:Sure, length of contract was a big issue, but I'm guessing there were others. I tend to believe the rumors of a rift between Cano and Girardi because Cano only wanted to hit third.
I care about the amounts and potential dead years in the context of how they limit other moves down the road. We know the Yankees have tremendous resources, but ownership still has a limit on how much payroll they will allow. I don't know what that limit is, but Cashman does. That is the line I care about. If a10-year Cano deal (or any deal) limits that flexibility, hell no, I don't want them going there. I don't think he'll even be paying 2B over the last half of that deal.glennhoffmania said:This is all reasonable but when we're talking about years we're really still talking about money. Put it this way- would you be pissed if NY signed Cano to a 210/7 deal? Given their resources they could easily pay that and it wouldn't impact other moves. Now if you're ok with that, what's the problem with say a 225/10 deal? Is it the extra $15m starting 7 years from now, or is it just the principle of giving someone 10 years instead of 7 years?
My point wasn't Japanese per se, but a style of pitching. Greater velocity from Tanaka, but again a masterful split-finger fastball.Lose Remerswaal said:
You missed a couple Japanese pitchers there.
TomRicardo said:
No. But there is still time to pick up Drew, another SP, and entire bullpen. They still lack any depth but maybe HGH-Sabathia (I mean they got a bunch of guys pinched in Biogenesis I am sure the Yankees have found a new lab to send their players) will bounce back.
Ed Hillel said:
I know this is a bit tangential, but there's no way that's HGH. Dude clearly had the Charlie Weis surgery, or some similar type of deal. Either that or he's seriously depressed/has AIDS.
Absolutely, there is a ton of risk.E5 Yaz said:Like we did with Dice-K.
The underlying point is ... no one knows. At all. Those who have seen him can make the educated guesses, but it's a crap shoot. They may well get good production from him for 7 years. But it's a helluva risk to make him a Top 5 paid pitcher at this stage
EvilEmpire said:I care about the amounts and potential dead years in the context of how they limit other moves down the road. We know the Yankees have tremendous resources, but ownership still has a limit on how much payroll they will allow. I don't know what that limit is, but Cashman does. That is the line I care about. If a10-year Cano deal (or any deal) limits that flexibility, hell no, I don't want them going there. I don't think he'll even be paying 2B over the last half of that deal.
If that's true, get rid of Girardi and keep the future HOF. Unless they know something about Cano that the rest of us don't (PEDs?), I don't see why they wouldn't have signed him if they were bound to go over the threshold anyhow. I understand their reluctance to go 10 years ever again, but I don't think that's anymore risky with a guy like Cano than 7 years on a guy who has (for the umpteenth time in this thread) not thrown a single pitch in the majors.Brickowski said:Sure, length of contract was a big issue, but I'm guessing there were others. I tend to believe the rumors of a rift between Cano and Girardi because Cano only wanted to hit third.
Given Cano's future value as a DH , I wonder how much Cano's relationship with Mr. Rodriquez influenced the Yankees approach to the negotiation.EvilEmpire said:I care about the amounts and potential dead years in the context of how they limit other moves down the road. We know the Yankees have tremendous resources, but ownership still has a limit on how much payroll they will allow. I don't know what that limit is, but Cashman does. That is the line I care about. If a10-year Cano deal (or any deal) limits that flexibility, hell no, I don't want them going there. I don't think he'll even be paying 2B over the last half of that deal.
Ok but again, if they signed him for 210/7 would you be ok with that, thinking that at worst it's two dead years (although I don't see why he wouldn't be a usable player when he's 38 even if not at 2B)? And do you really think that deal would limit flexibility?
/quote]
I don't know -- it really depends on whatever their actual internal limit is. I don't know what players they've passed on going after over their last few years with their current payroll and I don't know what opportunities they'll pass on in the future if they are already at that limit.
Given their financial resources, why do you think they passed on Cano at 10 years?
E5 Yaz said:
You owe everyone $10
Though I delight in seeing the Yankees squander money and underperform, I think this move makes the baseball in the AL East more interesting. I enjoy the idea of the Yankees spending zillions and being bad, but the plot lines are definitely more interesting this way (with Tanaka and Ellsbury playing in NY), and at the end of the day, it actually is more interesting and satisfying to see the Sox and Yankees both put good teams on the board (and then have the Sox win in a wild match of titans). You can get some satisfaction out of seeing the Sox kick around a weak Yankees team, but it can't be as good or last as long as seeing the Sox prevail over a worthier opponent (kind of like Achilles stomping Hector, as opposed to Woody Allen).Papi's fan said:I'm glad the Yanks signed Tanaka. That means to me that in the long run Ben should respond by making the Sox even better.
EvilEmpire said:I don't know -- it really depends on whatever their actual internal limit is. I don't know what players they've passed on going after over their last few years with their current payroll and I don't know what opportunities they'll pass on in the future if they are already at that limit.
Given their financial resources, why do you think they passed on Cano at 10 years?
Yaz4Ever said:If that's true, get rid of Girardi and keep the future HOF. Unless they know something about Cano that the rest of us don't (PEDs?), I don't see why they wouldn't have signed him if they were bound to go over the threshold anyhow. I understand their reluctance to go 10 years ever again, but I don't think that's anymore risky with a guy like Cano than 7 years on a guy who has (for the umpteenth time in this thread) not thrown a single pitch in the majors.
“We’re going to do what we’ve got to do to win. We had to make sure we had enough pitching to go together with our new lineup,” said Hank Steinbrenner following the signing. “There has been criticism of myself and my brother the last couple years that, gee, if our dad was still in charge, we’d be spending this and spending that and doing whatever it takes to win. He didn’t have revenue sharing, at least for most of his time. That’s what these people in the sports media don’t seem to get. If it wasn’t for revenue sharing, we’d have a payroll of $300M a year if we wanted to. So we’re doing this despite having to pay all that revenue sharing.”
Cowboys Idiots N Beards said:So now they have Tanaka, Sabathia, Nova, Kuroda and Pineda. Does that scare anyone?
joe dokes said:
I'd be excited if I could pitch and my last name ended in 'a.'
Well that's right. But it isn't Cano vs Girardi or even Cano vs Tanaka. It's what they were willing to pay for Cano.If that's true, get rid of Girardi and keep the future HOF. Unless they know something about Cano that the rest of us don't (PEDs?), I don't see why they wouldn't have signed him if they were bound to go over the threshold anyhow. I understand their reluctance to go 10 years ever again, but I don't think that's anymore risky with a guy like Cano than 7 years on a guy who has (for the umpteenth time in this thread) not thrown a single pitch in the majors.
ivanvamp said:2013 Yankees
C - Stewart
1b - Overbay
2b - Cano
3b - Rodriguez/Nix
SS - Nunez
LF - Wells
CF - Gardner
RF - Ichiro
DH - Hafner
Other notables: Granderson, Soriano, Reynolds
SP - Sabathia, Kuroda, Pettitte, Hughes, Phelps, Nova
RP - Logan, Betances, Kelley, Chamberlain, Robertson, Rivera
2014 Yankees
C - McCann
1b - Teixeira
2b - Roberts
3b - Nunez (Drew?)
SS - Jeter
LF - Gardner
CF - Ellsbury
RF - Beltran
DH - Soriano
Other notables: Ichiro, K. Johnson
SP - Sabathia, Tanaka, Kuroda, probably Garza, Nova
RP - Betances, Kelley, Thornton, Claiborne, Robertson, maybe Rodney/Balfour
I know they're spending money like crazy, but there's no way that the 2014 roster isn't significantly improved over the 2013 roster.
After three years of missing the playoffs, and lots of roster changes, I don't think many people had the Sox pegged at 97 wins. That's why they play the games.glennhoffmania said:Sure, they're better than last year. Last year they had a pythag of 79 wins. The question isn't whether they're better. The question is whether they did enough to become a 95 win team again. I don't think they did.
glennhoffmania said:
Sure, they're better than last year. Last year they had a pythag of 79 wins. The question isn't whether they're better. The question is whether they did enough to become a 95 win team again. I don't think they did.
ivanvamp said:I know they're spending money like crazy, but there's no way that the 2014 roster isn't significantly improved over the 2013 roster.
Rudy Pemberton said:
That's fair...but did the Sox do enough to go from a 74 win team by Pythag in '12 to a 95 win team in '13? On paper, probably not...yet they actually increased +26 in Pythag and +28 in real wins. Weird shit can happen.
Will be interesting to see what the projections look like for the Yankees.
That's fair. I wouldn't predict that it happens again with Boston this year eitherglennhoffmania said:I wouldn't predict it happens again this year with NY. There are so many unknowns on this team. If everything falls into place it absolutely could happen, but there are a lot of ifs.
RedOctober3829 said:If they had known all along they would spend on Tanaka with all their payroll obligations, why wouldn't they go all out to sign Cano?
EvilEmpire said:That's fair. I wouldn't predict that it happens again with Boston this year either
Seriously though, so much of the success and failure of the Yankees and Sox over the years has depended on player health. Those dice have yet to roll, so many things still seem possible.
Yankees are way more vulnerable to injuries though. That's for sure.
Friendly wager for charity? I'd put $50 on the Sox having less than 97 wins next season.glennhoffmania said:I agree that Boston won't improve by another 28 wins this year.
I doubt they would have offered the $175m if they knew he was on steroids, unless they knew for certain he wouldn't take it. But I wouldn't be surprised if there was some concern.rembrat said:Wild speculation on Cano? They know he is on steroids and didn't want to travel down that road again. Well, they would have for $175MM but not for the final tally.
EvilEmpire said:Friendly wager for charity? I'd put $50 on the Sox having less than 97 wins next season.