Indians turned down Yanks’ window request in Sabathia sweepstakes

DeLaRosa takes a step forward
A brief note about A-Rod

As more information emerges concerning the Brewers’ acquisition of CC Sabathia and the Yanks’ seemingly failed effort to land him this weekend, we’ll be able to piece together something of a narrative concerning the deal. We at RAB will also put this story to rest soon, but some interesting pieces of information are trickling out right now.

Unlike the Santana deal, we have no idea what the Yankees were offering for Sabathia. While, as I noted before, the asking price started with Phil Hughes, we’ve yet to hear the rumors of who else would have gone to Cleveland. But we know why the Indians turned down the Yanks, and it seems to have less to do with prospects and more with the Yanks’ approach to the deal.

Jack Curry clues us in:

In adding Sabathia, the Brewers beat out the Phillies, who were also willing to make the trade without requiring a window to negotiate a contract extension. The Yankees had discussions with the Indians, but were unwilling to make a deal unless they could sign Sabathia beyond 2008. The Yankees will probably be serious players in trying to sign him when he becomes a free agent after the season.

Sabathia could ask for an extension that is close to what the Mets gave Johan Santana (six years, $137.5 million), so the chances that he will remain with the Brewers are slim. Melvin was realistic about the future and said, “Most trades in July are going to be rentals.”

Sabathia rejected a four-year, $72 million proposal from Cleveland last spring.

Because Melvin knew Sabathia might be with Milwaukee only briefly, he wanted to trade for him as soon as possible. In making the deal Monday, Milwaukee can start Sabathia twice before the All-Star break. He was 5-3 with a 1.93 E.R.A. in his last 11 starts.

The Yankees were not about to sell off their top-rated prospects for just three months of CC Sabathia. According to Curry, when the Indians, who have long held this position, notified the Yanks that the team would not receive a 72-hour window to consummate a long-term deal, the Yankees seemingly backed out. I’m intrigued by this tidbit because, if true, it seems as though the Yanks were willing to part with some prospects if the parameters of the trade were similar to the Santana deal. While Brian Cashman told Tyler Kepner othwrise, the Yanks might have been willing to give up the youngsters for CC Sabathia and a long-term deal.

With this in mind, I believe these revelations strengthens my earlier proposition: If money is the only obstacle in signing Sabathia in the fall, the Yankees are the front runners. Of course, money isn’t the only obstacle; Sabathia has to want to come to New York. But we’ve already dissected that argument.

Meanwhile, one commenter earlier today suggested that the Brewers could sign Sabathia, but again, Curry’s article pretty much puts a nail firmly into that coffin. Doug Melvin, the Brewers’ GM, seems to recognize that Sabathia is a three-month rental and admits as much to Curry. If Milwaukee — a team that can’t really afford a five- or six-year, $100+ million contract — is attempting to pull the trigger on a deadline deal this early in July, the word “rental” seems more apt than anything else.

For now, the Sabathia Saga Part I has drawn to a close. The Brewers are primed to become serious contenders, and CC has a home away from the AL, away from the AL East, for the remainder of the 2008 season. Where he will in 2009 is anyone’s guess, but the team soon to inhabit a new stadium in the Bronx will be exerting a full-court press in their efforts to woo him this offseason. You — and CC — can take that one to the bank.

DeLaRosa takes a step forward
A brief note about A-Rod
  • http://mvn.com/milb-yankees Eric

    This was the right move for the Yankees to not surrender Hughes+ for 3 months of Sabathia, only to have him hit the open market and pay an enormous market price. It’s good to know that the Yanks were making a push for Sabathia, but still holding the line on the negotiating window. I am curious what they were offering as well, though I imagine it wouldn’t include Hughes or Joba. Could Austin Jackson have been in there? Ian Kennedy? Jose Tabata? Zach McAllister? I am quite curious, though we will probably never find out.

  • http://www.pinstripeprospectus.com Austin

    I think this trade to the Brewers is great, the Yankees are now in a perfect spot to sign in during the offseason, i hope they can make a deal with him

    • Joltin’ Joe

      I want CC and either the same guys we have that could leave through FA (Abreu, etc.). That’s not asking too much, is it? Tex is a waste of money, don’t argue that simple fact of life with me.

      • TurnTwo

        id rather have Tex at 1B than Abreu in RF.

        • Ed

          On equal length contracts, I’d agree. But with the Giambi sized contract it’ll probably take for Tex, no.

          • TurnTwo

            im for having player who gives the team the best opportunity to win.

            why settle for a couple years of an already declining Abreu when you could have 4 prime years of Tex, and then put up with a couple of declining years at the end of a deal?

            if you can fill RF or 1B with better options via the trade market, or thru other means, then thats fine, too.

            im just saying Abreu vs. Tex, this FA market after 2008.

  • Kay Sturns

    “You — and CC — can take that one to the bank.”

    oh no you didn’t

  • Pingback: Yanks Tried For CC « iYankees

  • Mark B

    I wouldn’t rule out the Brewers keeping Sabathia……they could easily use the money saved by Sheets ($11 million) and Gagne ($10 million) who become free agents after the year to parlay into a 5 yr / $100 million contract for CC. Probably a longshot, but I don’t think he is a slam dunk for the Yanks just because the Yankees can offer more money.

    PS: Ben – The Brewers’ GM is Doug and not Bob Melvin…..

    • TurnTwo

      they COULD offer him $21 million over the next 5 years, but as a small market team, they’ve never offered a contract larger than they just offered Braun, which topped out at like $45 million or something like that.

      i just dont see them comitting $20+ million to one player.

  • Steve

    I’d be shocked that the Yanks would value Sabathia more than Santana. To give him the same $$, and offer up a similar package a year after passing up on Johan just makes no sense to me. And I supported them passing up on Johan given the Twins asking price. Maybe there’s some organizational remorse? Certainly Hank has said so.

    Maybe they were troubled by Santana’s 2nd half numbers last year (which have continued the first half of this year) or maybe the timing wasn’t right. But Johan is a much better pitcher and has a better chance of remaining productive over the course of a long term deal.

    • whozat

      “Maybe they were troubled by Santana’s 2nd half numbers last year”

      “But Johan…has a better chance of remaining productive over the course of a long term deal”

      These two statements are directly contradictory. Santana’s physical decline, which began in the second half of last season, is a good reason to think that he WON’T remain productive over a long term deal.

      Also, they played in the santana sweepstakes, and they wanted to play in this one. The possibility of a window was a precursor in either case. This time, that wasn’t available. So they walked. No one is saying that, if they’d been given a window, Hughes and a truckload of others would be in Cleveland…just that they’d have been in the talks. Like they were with Santana.

      • Steve

        “These two statements are directly contradictory.”

        You sir, are 100% right. I was just thinking out loud there but that doesn’t add up. Must be one or the other.

  • Steve

    “Of course, money isn’t the only obstacle; Sabathia has to want to come to New York. But we’ve already dissected that argument.”

    Could you please link that for me? I must have missed that one and I’d like to read it.

  • mustang

    There is nothing new or shocking here. The only positive thing I can get out of this is that Cashman seems to finally be willing to trade some prospects for some much needed help. It seem that he has not given up on the 2008 season yet.

  • Rich

    I suspect that in addition to the money, the new stadium has to have some allure to most FAs.

  • Chip

    I’d be completely ok with a 5 year/100 million contract but who knows if that’s all it will take?

  • http://2009 Haggs

    Re: Hughes, isn’t there a rule about trading players that are on the DL?

    • whozat

      He could be a PTBNL

      • Andrew Davis

        PTBNL can’t be on the 40 man roster, which Hughes is. The commish has to approve any trade which involves a player on the DL, presumably this wouldn’t be an issue for a prospect

        • Chris

          or the Yankees could activate him, ship him to AAA, then trade him.

          • Ed

            Player’s Union wouldn’t allow that as his salary would drop massively and he’d loose out on Major League service time. If Cleveland immediately recalled and DL’d him the union would probably be ok, but I’d imagine Selig would object to the run around of the rules. No idea what he could do about it.

  • Adeel

    Cashman decided to argue for this “window” only after he was sure the Indians would not grant it. That way, he looks like he tried when he really did not want to land him.

    I really hope the Yankees make NO moves before the deadline. We have a lot of injuries and a lot of young unproven talent that would be selling low here. We are four games out, and if we don’t make it, we don’t make it… I’d rather that than go for broke only to have it blow up. Trade deadline acquisitions never end up meaning much, except headlines.

    Why do we need CC? Aren’t Sheets and Bedard also available? Aj Burnett (though maybe not in the same category)…. This might be a great offseason to acquire good arms. I am not much for CC, just cause the weight issues make me feel he is a future Colon/Ponson type….. I would actually think Bedard would be better just because his stock is so low right now you can probably have him cheap. Although I think he’s not the ace everyone thought with the O’s, but he is not as bad as people think now.

    I just don’t understand why every year it seems that 1/2 our pitching staff is on the DL. and not Petitte or Mussina but the young guys. Wang, Hughes, Rasner, etc have been there this year and last year…. There has got to be some coach somewhere screwing up. I mean how do you miss a stress fracture? that’s pathetic.

    • TurnTwo

      so it makes sense to go after Sheets, Burnett, and perhaps Bedard (he isnt a FA until after 2009), but you want to avoid Sabathia, because you’re afraid he’ll get injured or become a bad pitcher from being fat?

      how does this make sense?

      out of all of those names, Sabathia is the only one with any history of durability.

      you wonder why it always feels like 1/2 of our staff is always on the DL, so lets bring in pitchers who throughout their careers have frequented the DL?

      i do agree, though; i would rather see Cashman stand pat and take out chances then sell prospects and pay high on players who arent worth it.

      but i wouldnt mind importing a player who is under team control for the next couple years who can replace one of the FAs the yankees have after the season… a young RF or 1B, for example… maybe like a Garko or Francoeur-type player. can help now, and also help later.

    • whozat

      “I mean how do you miss a stress fracture? that’s pathetic.”

      The player doesn’t report anything, that’s how. You’re supposed to be a WARRIOR. Play through pain! Is it any surprise that players hide things? Especially young ones who want to prove themselves?

      It’s ridiculous that you’d assert that some coach is failing because Wang broke his foot and Hughes broke his ribcage. What, is someone hitting them with crowbars?

      “Cashman decided to argue for this “window” only after he was sure the Indians would not grant it.”

      Wow, that’s totally unsubstantiated. The acquisition NEVER made sense for the Yankees unless they could get a window…not unless it was for a list of B prospects. If it had to start with Hughes, then there had to be a window.

      • steve (different one)

        I just don’t understand why every year it seems that 1/2 our pitching staff is on the DL. and not Petitte or Mussina but the young guys. Wang, Hughes, Rasner, etc have been there this year and last year…. There has got to be some coach somewhere screwing up. I mean how do you miss a stress fracture? that’s pathetic.

        were you not watching when Wang got injured?

        it was a freak accident.

        we don’t always have to have someone to blame.

        also, Rasner got hit on the hand with a line drive.

        what are you even talking about?

  • Phil McCracken

    I’m glad to hear that Cashman was working hard for Sabathia.

    Makes a lot of sense now, that they tried to get the extension window and were denied.

    According to Sweeny on FAN the Indians were asking for Hughes and Austin Jackson.

    • TurnTwo

      while i dont believe the Brewers total package was extraordinary, Matt LaPorta is a substantial power bat that is almost MLB ready. It wouldnt surprise me to think that its out of the realm of possibility that it would have taken AJackson (who has upside but is not nearly as ready as LaPorta) and Hughes (who again has upside but has yet to put everything together at the MLB level in his brief time with the big league club) to get CC.

      Cashman made the right move in walking away once the window was denied.

      • Phil McCracken

        Even if they weren’t given the window, the Yankees had to have known they’d have a 95% chance of signing him anyways. I doubt he’d turn down an offer similar to Santana’s, unless he really hated New York.

        They could have done the same thing they did to ARod. Put a line in the sand saying that if he tested free agency at the end of the season, they wouldn’t bid on him.

        • http://yankeesetc.blogspot.com/ Travis G.

          right, so why pay twice for the same guy?

  • Andrew Davis

    Asking for the window is the only thing that makes sense for the Yanks, while we have a good farm, we can’t afford to throw away Hughes or AJAX for a rental, and 2 draft picks, Milwaukee could afford to move LaPorta with all their young bats.

    Also makes sense for Cleveland to go with non window teams, they didn’t want this turning into the A-Rod fiasco for Boston, and with a player like LaPorta on the table they were just fine grabbing him.

    I highly doubt Milwaukee signs CC, if he wouldn’t sign with Cleveland before the season, I doubt he suddenly will with Milwaukee, though if they make a big playoff run who knows. Additionally with Parra & Gallardo (coming back from injury) and their bats the Brewers a young team with some talented pitching. The can look to move J.J. Hardy for another arm in the off season along with some of the other young talent they have and reload.

  • Steve S

    I just hope Hughes is brought back in August. If Cashman believed he could be a part fo this staff in April then the injury or the limited results should not merit some kid of demotion. Especially with the state of rotation and the reality of adding an impact arm, Id much rather see Hughes in any form rather than Ponson, Rasner, Karstens, Pavano, or Igawa.

    It would have made no sense for Cashman to give up Hughes for Sabathia and not for Santana who is still the better pitcher. I know Santana has shows some signs of being human the last two seasons but I still am not convinced that Sabathia is a better investment for even five years considering his weight and the fact that he has thrown almost 200 more innings than Santana in his career. Not to mention the fact that Santana has been pretty dominant this year even if it isnt reflected in the win/loss column (all his peripherals say he should be winning a lot more games) . He is just on a below .500 team in the NL with an awful bullpen. And he still isnt worth the contract he got but I think he is the much safer bet over Sabathia.

    • whozat

      “I know Santana has shows some signs of being human”

      It’s not just this. He’s shown signs of physical degradation. His fastball has lost a couple MPH already. He doesn’t throw his slider as much. His peripherals didn’t get better, despite going to a league where he faces pitchers and pinch hitters multiple times a game. Perhaps he’ll miss a year out of the next two with surgery and then finish strong. Or, perhaps he’s begun his decline phase and will be an albatross in 3-4 years. Not Zito-style, but perhaps Pedro-style.

      I just don’t understand how Santana could have been a safer bet when he was already showing signs of physical breakdown before the Mets even got him

      • Steve S

        I know people are loving the velocity argument but to me he has an ERA+ of 138 and he has historically been a better second half pitcher. I agree the contract will be a problem beyond the first four years, as no 33 year old pitcher is worth $20 M.

        I dont understand how you can speculate on the health of a guy who has started at least 33 games over the last five years and never really had injury problems in the past. Not only that, you have him missing an entire year from elbow surgery when the guy is on pace to pitch 200 innings.

        And I explained why Santana is the safer bet, CC has thrown 1500+ innings in his career and is only a year younger than Santana. Not to mention the fact that the guy is easily over 250lbs. Thats not a good combination for a long term successful pitcher. Not to mention the fact that he has only been able to go 200 innings twice in his entire career. If we are going to speculate about injuries rather than effectiveness then CC Sabathia definitely wins the “more likely to get hurt” argument.

        Its all speculation and there is an argument to be made for either and its easy to say that paying a starting pitcher at ages 33-35 $20 M is going to be a problem. My thought is that Santana seems to project better over the next five years because the guy has been the better pitcher except for last year and the May-July of this year. and its not as if he has been bad, he just hasn’t lived up to his own dominance in the past.

        • Chris

          I know people are loving the velocity argument but to me he has an ERA+ of 138 and he has historically been a better second half pitcher.

          The problem is that he historically has been a second half pitcher, but he wasn’t last year. Is that real, or was is just a one year fluke? I don’t know, but it certainly is looking more real. He’s still a good pitcher, but not the great pitcher the Mets thought they were getting.

        • Hybrid Moments

          Its just something that people who over value prospects tell themselves to feel better about passing on Johan. The fact that Cashman seemed willing to surrender top prospects and pay top dollar for Sabathia means he realized he made a mistake by passing on Santana.

    • Clayton

      The 200 innings might come from being a starting pitcher since 2001 while Santana has only been a full time starter since 03.

      • Steve S

        yes but since santana made the transition he hasn’t failed to get to 200 innings, and that was my point.

        • Chris

          If you drop the 200 inning cutoff to 196.7, then CC has reached that 4 of the past 6 years. Every year in the majors he’s pitched at least 180 innings – and that includes his rookie season.

          This can be viewed as a good thing (he’s durable) or a bad thing (he’s got a lot of wear and tear).

          • Steve S

            Santana has also managed to throw at least 219 since becoming a starter. You can make the argument either way. I just think santana is the better pitcher and is less likely to get hurt with regards to the two.

    • Chris

      One other thing to consider is that Johan Santana has been on the DL with arm problems before (elbow) while CC Sabathia has only been on the DL for a strained oblique.

      That doesn’t mean that one is more injury prone than the other, but I always get concerned about arm injuries to pitchers.

      • Steve S

        When was Santana on the DL for an elbow injury? Was that back in 2001 before he even made the majors?

        • http://www.riveraveblues.com Ben K.

          He had elbow surgery in 2003 during the off-season.

          • Steve S

            Ben that was remove bone chips, there was no ligament damage and that was before he became a starter and he didnt even go on the DL for that.

            • http://www.riveraveblues.com Ben K.

              I’m not getting involved in this “who would I rather have” debate, but let me just point out that you’re arguing semantics a bit.

              He didn’t go on the DL because it was during the offseason, and while a bone chips issue isn’t nearly the same as ligament damage, elbow surgery is elbow surgery. It’s never good when a pitcher has it.

              And you’re wrong about how that was before he became a starter. The Twins converted him into a starter halfway through the 2003 season.

              • Steve S

                I dont think its semantics. A player that hasnt spent anytime on the DL is much more valuable than a player who has. The yankees scouting department has demonstrated that elbow surgery has degrees of severity. And when the guy is able to rehab, come back win 20 games, the cy-young and throw 228 innings, I think the concerns about that injury and that surgery shouldnt be something that comes up in the discussion 5 years later.

                • http://www.riveraveblues.com Ben K.

                  He didn’t spend time on the DL because the season was over. There was no need to go on the DL. Everyone knows he’s had elbow surgery, and that impacts him. That’s all there is to it. Five years later, scar tissue is still there, and five years later, elbow problems could creep up.

                • Steve S

                  I understood you the first time. My point is, the timing of an injury is important and the fact that he waited until the offseason seems to make it seem minor. Especially at that stage in his career. A guy who cant play in January is not as important as a guy who cant play in July, last time I checked.

                  Okay, elbow problems can always creep up, its not a natural motion. And if that were the case the Yankees would officially be idiots for drafting guys like Brackman and Melancon.

                  You guys are stuck on this because you spent the whole offseason bemoaning the loss of the big three and now that it has hit a snag youll make any argument possible for signing Sabathia as opposed to Santana.

                • http://www.riveraveblues.com Ben K.

                  Whoa whoa whoa.

                  Have I advocated for signing one over the other? As I said, I’m not jumping into this debate. I stopped by to fill in some information about Santana’s arm surgery. Since you’re just here to pick a fight and attack us about Johan Santana, I’m done here.

                • Steve S

                  Im not here to pick a fight Ben, but you guys are losing some of your objectivity when it comes to this stuff. To sit here and comment on the Yankees talks for CC and then not discuss the parallels with the Santana deal is ridiculous to me. My original point was that the yankees would be insane to trade Hughes for Sabathia five months after they refused to trade for Santana. And to me Santana was the safer bet of the two (and some of the non-revisionists here will remember that point was made quite often here in January and February). You decide to throw in that elbow surgery, with the qualifier that you arent going to enter into the argument. But the minute you said it you were taking a side. And to me you guys have conflict here when it comes to discussing the realities of that Johan trade.

                • http://www.riveraveblues.com Ben K.

                  My original point was that the yankees would be insane to trade Hughes for Sabathia five months after they refused to trade for Santana.

                  Agreed.

  • whozat

    “Not only that, you have him missing an entire year from elbow surgery when the guy is on pace to pitch 200 innings. ”

    I don’t “have” him doing anything.

    I said “perhaps”

    I don’t see how you can ignore the fact that he has already lost velocity in the first year of his long deal. And that he’s throwing his slider less, possibly to protect his arm. These are two significant red flags if I’m thinking about projecting a guy’s health six years into the future. Your rationale for not worrying? He’s been healthy so far and he’s keeping runs off the board this season. Classic short-sightedness.

    • Steve S

      Im not saying Johan is going to be fine but you have yet to respond to anything I have said about Sabathia and the reality of his long term health. Thats classic avoidng the argument. Not to mention the fact that you are ignoring the fact that CC managed to go on the DL a couple of times (and missed a significant amount of time) in both 2005 and 2006. not to mention the fact that CC’s innings could arguably have put more stress on his arm as he tends to throw a lot more pitches than Santana over the course of their careers.

      My point isnt Johan against the field. Its Johan vs CC Sabathia. Im not ignoring the fact that he is already having diminished returns and there is a possibility of him having arm problems. I just see the reality that Santana and his stuff seems to translate even with the reduced velocity and to say he is the one more likely to get hurt is simply guessing and subjectively choosing certain things.

      • whozat

        “the fact that CC managed to go on the DL a couple of times (and missed a significant amount of time) in both 2005 and 2006.”

        It was a month each time. Wang’s missed similar amounts of time in two of the last three years. More, in one case. Would you be leery of his long-term health?

        Yes, CC is big. He’s not had leg problems, which is what I’d worry about with a big man. He’s also never had arm problems, which is a big deal.

        Santana is RIGHT NOW exhibiting signs that his body can’t throw like it did when he was winning those Cy Young awards. He’s been showing these signs for a year. This isn’t a blip anymore.

        There are no guarantees. But, when faced with the prospect of signing two guys to a long deal and one is already showing diminished velocity on his FB and is avoiding throwing a pitch that stresses his elbow…I’m going to go with the other guy.

        • Steve S

          We can just agree to to disagree.

          I know the signs your pointing to but a drop in velocity could just be a product of age and not health. Most pitchers lose velocity as they get older, its doesnt always mean that they have arm problems.

          As for CC, big guys have multiple concerns, including his legs, his back and the general concern that his lack of athleticism can lead to little injuries more often than a guy who keeps himself in good shape.

          You wanna go with 275lb guy who has more wear on the tires and has shown no commitment to conditioning and has had injiuries then thats fine. Ill go with the other guy.

          • whozat

            “Most pitchers lose velocity as they get older, its doesnt always mean that they have arm problems. ”

            The guy’s not even 30. If he’s losing velocity at 29, and it’s merely due to aging…that’s even worse than injury because it means you can’t have offseason surgery to fix it. The velocity’s just gone. And there’s six years left on the deal.

            I am also not saying that the Yankees should have built a deal about Hughes et al for Sabathia. I am, however, saying that both guys carry longevity concerns. Since Santana is currently exhibiting a decline in his stuff, that spooks me a lot more than two months worth of oblique injures two years ago and “he’s fat so he’ll get injured more.”

            • Steve S

              Its not as if his velocity has plummeted a ala Mike Mussina he is down a couple mph which matters but I dont know if thats indicative of a guy breaking down. And thirty is usually the time for non steroid filled individuals to start transitioning and making adjustments. There are very few pitchers who maintain the same velocity from age 25 to age 30. If Santana plateu’s right here velocity wise, then is their an issue? I wouldnt think so.

              As for the contract. I agree but that was never my point, none of these guys will be worth what they are going to get paid at the back end of the contract.

              Like I said we can agree to disagree. I just think Santana is getting a bad rap him for various reasons.

              • steve (different one)

                didn’t the Hardball Times do a study that showed that overweight pitchers actually tend to be more durable than their peers?

  • tommiesmithjohncarlos

    Can we finally put to bed, then, the “we shouldn’t part with Prospect X for Established Player Y because he’s just a rental” line of thought?

    Arguing the merits of trading guys like Hughes, Kennedy, Tabata and Jackson for Sabathia or Santana has value, but if we erroneously label Sabathia or Santana “rentals”, we’re wrongly skewing the argument. Cashman was never interested in Sabathia as a rental, only as an extended building block for our rotation years into the future. So let’s not engage in Fox-Newsian semantics games to try and make a weak argument seem stronger.

  • Adrian-Retire21

    Well it’s good we didn’t make the deal.But it’s good to know Cashman is not gonna give up on the season like some Yankees fans are okay with.

  • TurnTwo

    this is from Buster’s chat today on ESPN… seems as tho its very contradictory to what Jack Curry is reporting:

    Bobby, NY: Buster, just how close did the Yankees come to landing CC? I have been hearing various conflicting things about it. Also, do you think they are front runner to sign him in the off-season? Do you think they need to? Thanks

    Buster Olney: (1:15 PM ET ) Bobby: They weren’t involved at all in the Sabathia talks, and without question, you would have to install them as the early favorite to sign him, because they’ll be the team offering the biggest payday, with so much money coming off their payroll and with a distinct need for help in the rotation. Right now, I’d guess that there’s a 60-70 percent chance he winds up in the Bronx next spring… All things being equal, he’d probably love to play in his native California next year, but it’s hard to see anyone coming within $50 million of what the Yankees will offer…

    • tommiesmithjohncarlos

      CC is from Vallejo, California, which is just miles from San Fransisco and Oakland. To help CC feel at home in NYC, we should sign rapper E-40, competitive eater Joey Chestnut, and pornstar Monique Alexander to “special advisor” positions immediately.

      Especially Monique Alexander. (don’t worry, it’s work safe)

      • http://www.riveraveblues.com Ben K.

        I know more about Monique Alexander’s porn history than I ever thought possible. Thanks, wikipedia!

        • tommiesmithjohncarlos

          Wikipedia: Chock-Full of Truthiness(tm).

  • pete

    how bout this for 2009 yanks rotation: Sabathia, Wang, Joba, Yu Darvish, Mussina (ya i said it – i say give hughes as much more time in the minors as you can give him and make him refine at least one more pitch into a legit pitch)
    If pettitte is willing to come back, maybe him over mussina, maybe not.

    • http://yankeesetc.blogspot.com/ Travis G.

      the darvish talk is even more premature than the sabathia talk. odds are he wont even be posted. and if he is, you never know when a crazy team (ahem, boston, texas, mets) will make an outrageous offer, and the yanks have no way of countering it bc of the ‘blind’ bidding process. that said, it would be nice to acquire him.