When you say NY won't be spending any more money, what are you basing that on? There doesn't seem to be any reason that they wouldn't spend more money if they decide they need something. I was surprised they didn't sign Ubaldo or Santana.
Sampo Gida said:
Jeter is not going to be benched in his retirement year, even if he hits under 200., and the Yankees have been pretty firm they won't be spending any more money. I think it would take an injury to Jeter to get them to rethink this.
With Iglesias looking to be out for the year, and perhaps not such a sure thing as a SS of the future, I think the Tigers are probably Drews best hope. They may be playing a bit of chicken at the moment.
Lowrielicious said:
Not benched, but I'd be very surprised if he would be able to play more than 120 games in the field given his age and returning from injury. He will need plenty of games at DH to survive the season.
Either he gets plenty of days off from the field at DH (or off the field completely) or he breaks down. Either way they need a better option than bouncing everyone around 2b/3b/ss when Jeter is not playing.
If Ryan can't stay healthy to do that then they will need something. Maybe the plan is to use Anna as that something I guess.
Last time we heard that the Yankees were on a budget was just prior to Tanaka/McCann/Ellsbury/Beltran. 470+million dollars later.....
I think one of the few options for Drew at the moment is to sign (another) 1 year pillow contract. Show what he can do as a lefty in that park, then hit the yankees up for a 4 year deal next offseason with Jeter off the books and off the field.
A 1 year shot at Detroit (assuming he can get that) would net him more playing time, but his numbers will look a lot better after a year dropping them over the short porch in Yankee stadium.
Rudy Pemberton said:If so, what's he waiting for?
judyb said:I'd imagine NYY wouldn't want Drew for more than 1 year with Hanley, Hardy, Asdrubal, etc., FAs next year, and he wouldn't take 1 year from them because of Jeter.
soxhop411 said:“@pgammo: While many hoped Scott Boras 3/$39M two, not one GM, claimed meant Drew had a home, Boras says any unnamed GM is "darts, not facts."”
Can someone translate this tweet?
I did see Gammo sitting next to JP Ricciardi at a Mets ST game on Thursday. They were bending each others ears all game long though Ricciardi went into his shell when Farnsworth was brought in.Sampo Gida said:
I read it as 2 unnamed GM's said Boras had a 3/39 deal, and many hoped it meant Drew had a home, but Boras is basically denying the claim by saying unnamed GM's are not credible sources
The Detroit Tigers, who might be without Jose Iglesias for the season, have acquired veteran shortstop Alex Gonzalez from the Baltimore Orioles, according to the Baltimore Sun.
No further details were immediately available.
Rudy Pemberton said:Yeah....and I highly doubt that giving Drew a 3 year deal is suddenly going to convince Stanton that he should sign an extension with the team.
I don't see Pittsburgh as a fit; Mercer is a good young player whose stats last year were pretty similar to Drew's. The Reds and Royals have Cozart, and Escobar, who are at the very least really good defensive SS's, too.
Both
Royals payroll is at $90M, with the Reds over $100M. Tough to see how either team has the wiggle room to make an offer, especially one that is more than the Mets deal Drew has already supposedly rejected?
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:That draft pick compensation is just killing Drew's market.
At what point does Drew consider firing Boras? While admittedly circumstances could change quickly, at the present time turning down the QO appears to be a colossal mistake. If your agent winds up costing you $10 million or so, you probably have to sack him, right?
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:I would be utterly shocked that Drew ever received a 3/39 offer. And if my some miracle he did receive one, there's zero chance he'd turn it down.
Boras is lying about such an offer, of course.
Sampo Gida said:
The Tigers just gave up a young cost controlled IF'er with some upside for a 37 yo replacement level SS. Odds are Lombardozzi is better than anyone the Tigers get with their 1st round pick.
ForceAtHome said:
You seem to be massively overrating Lombardozzi. He has a .264/.297/.342/.639 career slash line. He's versatile in that he can play LF/2B/3B regularly and probably cover just about any position on the field in a pinch. But, despite the versatility, he's a pretty mediocre defender and a poor hitter. How much do mediocre utility infielders make? Being cost controlled isn't a huge benefit if you're not saving much, and having control of a bad player isn't extremely useful.
Lombardozzi has a negative career bWAR and fWAR. I would take the risk on a first round pick that might miss 2 out of 3 times for that shot of getting one player who is actually good rather than controlling one mediocre utility infielder who can't get on base 30% of the time and isn't a great defender. For your comment about Alex Gonzalez being replacement level... that's exactly what Steve Lombardozzi is as well.
Sampo Gida said:
Actually there is only a 15% chance at that slot of getting a league average player based on the historical records at B-Ref. Lombardozzi is coming off his age 24 season and his AAA and AA numbers project him as a better hitter than he has shown
Age 21 AA
.295/ 373/ 524/ 897
Age 22 AA
309/ 366/ 454/ 820
Age 22 AAA-
310/ 354/ 408/ 762
His development might have been retarded being fast tracked as he was
Had a nice 2nd half last year that could be a sign of a breakout although that could be SSS and he had a dismal ST (not that ST stats should count much). Adrian Gonzalez has little upside at this point (although he had a great ST so maybe the Tigers look at ST stats more than us).
You mean the guy who's control fell off the table in 2H? Pitch to contact guys who suddenly can't find the plate end up very, very vulnerable. Douglas Wildes Fister, name and nature.ForceAtHome said:
The real story here is how awful that Fister trade was for the Tigers. He's the guy they'll miss.
Sampo Gida said:
No evidence Boras even said it. Some unnamed GM trying to make him look bad (hence Boras calling it darts). No doubt he takes a 3/39 with no questions asked. Boras is many things but dumb is probably not one of them.
ForceAtHome said:
If the Tigers view Lombardozzi as at or near replacement level (which I would guess they do based on the trade they just made), he just isn't that valuable to them. Also, Steve Lombardozzi can't handle shortstop so he wasn't ever an option to be their every day starter once Iglesias went down with an injury. Considering Detroit needs someone they can play every day, Gonzalez . Whether trading for Gonzalez was the right move or not and a solution for the Tigers, comparing the value of Lombardozzi to the Tigers versus their first round pick is not the way to illustrate it.
My point wasn't that the Tigers have a 33% chance of getting something useful with their pick or a 15% chance. The point is, if Lombardozzi is replacement level in their eyes, it makes more sense to take the lottery ticket at getting a good player than to hold on to a replacement level utility guy because he's cheap and cost controlled, especially when he doesn't even fit their pressing need. How much value do you think a utility infielder who can't play SS has? Nobody laments the loss of, say, Pedro Ciriaco in Boston. I doubt anyone in Detroit will miss Lombo. The real story here is how awful that Fister trade was for the Tigers. He's the guy they'll miss.
Sampo Gida said:Fister trade looks bad on paper, but he has had some elbow problems this ST (last 18 starts last year he had a 4.07 ERA and a WHIP close to 1.5) , so me thinks Detroit might have sold high.
That's also part of what makes Drew a possible fit for Pittsburgh, but they seem comfortable that they have it covered with Mercer backed up by Barmes. They could be a perfect landing spot come mid-season, assuming they are still in contention.ForceAtHome said:Getting away from Cabrera and Fielder in his infield should help one of the most extreme groundball pitchers in the game, too.
vintage'67 said:I read the quotes as stating the reality that the players face, not revealing something that wasn't thought of by a MLB baseball ops. person. I think these are the concerns any team thinking about these 2 players would have--it's really unlikely these issues would not have been on the mind of MLB decision makers without first reading them in a Buster Olney column. Their value is low because of this reality; it wasn't created by the comments.
"I'm pretty content with our infield right now," Steinbrenner said. "I think guys like Anna and Solarte have been pleasant surprises. Kelly Johnson has been good. Derek's healthy. So far, so good, but it's early."