Jan
31

We’ll always have C.C.

By

The Yanks may have lost out on Johan Santana, but for one year, I think we’ll be okay. “One year?” you ask. “What happens in one year?” Well, that’s when C.C. Sabathia becomes a free agent. It’s highly doubtful that Indians will re-sign Sabathia after 2008 as Paul Hoynes and Jim Ingraham write. The Indians, very much in competition for the AL Central, can’t trade C.C. this year. So when November rolls around, I’d expect a good ol’ fashioned bidding war. It’s never too early…

Categories : Asides, Hot Stove League

29 Comments»

  1. Tommy says:

    It’s never too early to start c.c.’ing “Sabathia” in all your inter-office e-mails.

  2. I would be more wary of giving Sabathia a long term deal than I would have to Santana. The twins were always so careful with Santana because of the value of his arm. I wonder what kind of a season Sabbathia will have this year after pitching nearly 250 innings just in the regular season.

  3. zack says:

    Let the bidding wars and rumors begin. I am sure the Yanks and Sox will be heavily involved,. as will some other teams.

    It will be interesting to see how he does. He obviously tired last season and hes been around for 7 full seasons already pitching an average of about 190 or so innings a season. That’s a lot of wear and tear on a what will be a 28 year old arm. Way more than what Johan had. Plus, he only really started putting it together in 2006. Hes a big boy, but who knows if he’ll crash and burn earlier…

    On the other hand, his #s for the most part show a pretty strong and consistent positive trend, so they do support that he really is coming into his prime now, right on schedule. And of course, a rotation of CC, Wang, Joba, Phil, IPK/Pettitte would be awesome and Sabathia wouldn’t have to be the ace….

    • Caleb says:

      CC started young, but he should be out of the so-called injury nexus by now. I do recognize that he flagged a bit down the stretch, and 255 IP in this era always raises some eyebrows. That said, Johan has averaged 228 IP over the past 4 years, albeit with better managed pitch counts.

  4. zack says:

    Oh, and the crap-ass media is at it already:
    http://preview.tinyurl.com/37tplm

    Sherman, pretty much unprovoked, decides to already start with the “If Hughes fails, Cashman’s job is on the line” and “if Santana goes xyz and Hughes is on the dl or only abc than there will be hell to pay” crap. I won’t even bother dissecting the article b/c it annoys me too much, but we should all be prepared for a whole season of constant comparisons, immediate reactions from the media as to why Cashman should have made the trade, etc etc…

    • Ben K. says:

      Of course, those are the same writers that, in three years, will be bemoaning the albatross choking the Mets that is the Johan Santana contract.

      • ceciguante says:

        i agree, zack & ben — the media will almost always write the most inflammatory story possible, for sales, when it’s obvious that this deal can’t be fairly assessed for years. but….if santana leads the mets to a WS victory, minaya is a genius and immune to any “4 year albatross” criticism. that’s the whole point of a competitive team making this trade — the ring.

  5. Steve S says:

    MLB Trade Rumors has the link to an ESPN article that says Sabathia is quoted as saying he would like to stay in Cleveland and the negotiations are proceeding.

    For whatever its worth. Probably just posturing by C.C. BUT I dont think its a foregone conclusion they the Indians do not sign him. They arent the biggest spenders but they do have some money. and the remaining parts of their team are relatively affordable.

    The real question, is if the Indians bomb out of the gate this year, lets say do to injuries. What kind of package do you offer at midseason for him?

  6. [...] a deal won’t be reached until tomorrow, if at all. C. C. Sabathia may not want to start spending like crazy quite [...]

  7. Jeff says:

    Zack – It shouldn’t even go that far to compare Hughes… seeing the deal could have been done for less.
    If Santana kicks ass and our team shows that he could have helped us I think the criticism is deserved.
    CC will fetch the same contract as Santana if not more on the open market so I’m not really sure why this would be a rumor you want to start when we just proved we want to keep it in house and avoid big contract to pitchers. Isn’t that the philosophy?

    • Ben K. says:

      No. The philosophy is not giving up the farm for one year of a contract. While I’m hesitant to give a seven-year deal to any pitcher, I have no problem with the Yanks doling our big contracts they can afford on the open market. It’s when a team like the Twins tries to fleece their potential trading partners for what amounts to one year of a contract and an exclusive negotiating window that we grow hesitant of the trade.

    • ceciguante says:

      yes. the criticism will always be there if the players who would’ve been traded are performing on very different levels. ben, this “trading for the right to one year” argument is half baked to me, because the yanks may well have virtually as much money to spend as they want. i read yesterday’s post where the argument was that nobody claiming the yanks have all that money to spend freely has actually checked the books. that’s a faulty argument. the obvious response is…neither have you. anyone relying on an argument of “it’s too expensive” is also arguing from a position of ignorance.

      hopefully this trade isn’t a disaster, and i eat all my words of doubt. but if the mets are playing the red sox in the WS next year, and we’re still talking about innings caps for the big 3…it will be hard for any of you “save the kids” types to convince me that we didn’t completely blow this deal.

      • Ben K. says:

        If you want to judge this trade on what happens in one year, so be it. Get back to me in 2013 when the Mets are still paying Johan Santana $25 million and their farm system still sucks.

        • usty says:

          And we’ll be paying a 38 year old 3B 30 mil. Apples and oranges with a pitcher vs. a everyday player, but still. Money to the NY teams is all relative. If they really want something that will improve their team, they can always afford it, despite the “bad” contracts that seem to come up in the later years. We still signed A-Rod, Pettitte and re-upped Abreu despite Giambi’s 25 million albatross this year. It just doesn’t matter, as these teams can eat those deals and not be precluded from anything.

          It’s the maxxing out a credit card plan, you need it now, spend the money and worry about the interest later. Only with the Yanks and Mets, that interest never really seems to catch up to them. Sure it could one day, but focusing on that when it comes to proven commodities like Johan doesn’t make sense to me. Throwing 45 million to a 38 year old closer seems a little more crazy.

          • actually thats one of the great things about Alex’s contract. Its front weighted so we won’t be paying through the nose for him when he is declining.

          • zack says:

            as Ben said, to compare one season, or even two of Hughes to Santana is silly and not the point. A) you have to look at EVERYONE the Yanks would have given up B) you have to look at it over the course of the 7 or so years. Nobody thinks that Hughes will be better than Johan NEXT YEAR, but he sure as heck might be in 2-3, and not even in his prime yet. Thats the problem with these types of articles, the problem with the old George, and the problem with Hank laying Cashman’s job on the line. The true potential of Hughes and Cashman’s plan won’t be fully realized or felt for another 3 years most likely. Thats not to say Hughes won’t have a great year this season, but I wouldn’t put money on it being better than Johan’s. Does that mean the deal should have been made? Absolutely not.

          • sciorsci says:

            a 38 yo 3B who will either have or be pursuing the all-time HR crown at that point. Don’t underestimate the marketing leverage that provides. By the time A-Rod is no longer worth his salary from a performance standpoint, he’ll still be providing the revenue to cover his own salary. The same cannot be said for Santana.

  8. Jamal G says:

    With that body and those innings already logged (and another 230 more for this upcoming season) I would not want the Yankees to go above 4 years. You can pay him out the ass if you want to but I will get sick if I hear anything about a 5-6 year deal.

  9. Jake says:

    Yeah, I think I would rather gave given up IPK, Melky and Marquez for the chance to give Santana a big deal over giving C.C. one as a free agent. C.C. seems like a bigger gamble, with lower payoff, than Santana to me. I think if the Yanks weren’t willing to make the commitment in years and dollars to Santana, they shouldn’t to C.C.

  10. LBA Prequel says:

    I wouldn’t mind seeing us go after Sabathia, but I have a gut feeling he’ll stay with Cleveland. We’ll need somebody to replace Pettitte in the rotation with experience, and Sabathia fits the bill.

    Wang
    Sabathia
    Hughes
    Chamberlain
    Kennedy

    I like.

  11. Chip says:

    I for one would rather have Peavy but that’s a whole different story. The Yankees will start out offering a five year contract but they’ll eventually end up giving him a 6th year unless he completely and utterly blows it this year. I’ll predict a 6 year 19 million per contract as long as he can keep his ERA under 4 this season. Of course we could see a dominating year by all of the big three and have Horne pushing to get into the rotation with a great season in which case nobody will be saying that we need another pitcher with our logjam.

    This is very unlikely of course but I like the thought. Maybe we can then throw a few of our pitchers together (I’m thinking something like Wang and Horne) and get a Scott Kazmir? This is the great thing about being loaded with pitching depth, you just never know

  12. Spike says:

    Crooked Cap

  13. Bo says:

    I’d much rather have Hughes/IPK/Sabathia than Santana

    • Jake says:

      If you believe that Hughes was off the table, then it’s IPK/Sabathia or Santana. Plus, we could have had Santana. There is no guarantee we get Sabathia.

      • Travis G. says:

        according to Heyman, the Twins last offer was: Kennedy, Wang AND Melky and Marquez.

        “When the Twins made a last pass at the Yankees on Tuesday, it was too late. So when Cashman told the Twins yet again that Hughes was off the table, the Twins went for the gusto, requesting that instead Cashman send them both Kennedy and Chien-Ming Wang to go with Cabrera and Marquez. Why not? By then, it was clear that there was only one place left to go, and that was the Mets.”
        http://sportsillustrated.cnn.c.....cap/1.html

  14. sciorsci says:

    For those of you who are skeptical of Sabathia because of his “body type” – i.e., because he’s a big guy who is carrying around extra weight on an already large frame, are you also the same people who get nervous about smaller pitchers breaking down early because their bodies can’t handle the torque that their motion creates?

    If anything, I would think that Sabathia would be a safer bet to be able to pitch well into his 30′s. I don’t think I’d ever be in favor of deals for SPs in their late 20s/early 30s that extend beyond 5 years (because there’s not a whole lot you can do with them in terms of roster flexibility if they do flame out). Position players are a different story, particularly for teams like the Yankees, because even if they do decline greatly – such as Giambi – you’re going to carry some hitters on the bench anyway. Do the Yankees really suffer all that horribly if they have to carry a guy like Giambi (or Posada in a few years) on the bench at a high salary if it means getting those productive years out of them earlier in the contract?

    With pitchers, there’s really nowhere to hide them. Even in the bullpen, you’re going to use them, and there’s no guarantee they can ever transition to that role. What then? Carry 12 pitchers to hide your old, broken-down ex-ace? Put yourself at a competitive disadvantage by using what essentially amounts to a 24-man roster?

  15. Jeff says:

    Sorry Ben I was busy at work and I forgot I left a post that you replied to…
    Well like always I disagree with you guys. Giving up IPK and the players that would have gone with the trade (Bergen) wouldn’t have been giving up the farm… I also consider Santana to be far superior to CC (who will probably command more $ as a FA) and think it would have been worth while to pursue that one. I don’t think pulling Sabathia is any more of a catch even if you consider the players involved… maybe my opinion speaks to my belief that Santana would have been the perfect fit for us. Pluse it would have been an extra year of us dominating.

  16. rob says:

    hi, I am a mets fan, but my roommate is a yankee fan and he has been all over CC. I definitely thin that was in the back of Cashman’s mind when he chose not to trade any youngster for Santana. I think Cashman is confident in this years club, and why give up valuable prospects for a number one when you can just sign one a year later. After all, the Yankees do not need Santana like the MEes do. The Yankees, keep in mind, were better than the red sox from june through september. As a Mets fan I hate Cashman. Why? Because he is so good. He realizes that the core of a team comes from the minors. I have the utmost respect for Cashman and for his sake I hope Yankee fans do not get on him if the Yankees get off to a bad start and Santana dominates with the Mets

Leave a Reply

You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

If this is your first time commenting on River Ave. Blues, please review the RAB Commenter Guidelines. Login for commenting features. Register for RAB.