Sep
04

News on Cashman remains the same

By

Ed Price checks in to tell us that Brian Cashman still hasn’t decided on the future and won’t until after the season ends. Which is the same thing we’ve heard since, oh, Spring Training. The Day of Reckoning draws nearer.

Categories : Asides

18 Comments»

  1. Axl says:

    I’d be the greatest GM of all time if they hired me. But they won’t.

    Guaranteed numerous Titles. I’m that good.

  2. MD says:

    Hal and Hank are nowhere near as “high maintenance” as George was…..no reason why he’d leave now…..every reason to stay, among them family, the building of the minors, and the fact that the Yanks pretty much pay the most…..he already has most of the power he wanted……

    • A.D. says:

      could go to Seattle clean that team up in a worse division with less expectation and look like a genius, when Seattle can’t get much worse

      • MD says:

        why do that when he can be the man that brought the Yanks back….with the resources to do it quickly……and not move the family?

    • Mark B says:

      $2.5 million, a raise of @ 25% over his current deal over 3-4 years with complete autonomy as before – in writing should possibly do it.

      • Brad Kraus says:

        If you fail at your job, repeatedly, would you get a 25% raise? I had a great year and I work for a fortune 500 company that posted record growth, and profits, and I still got 4%.

        If they offer Cash anything, and I still think they shouldn’t, it should be a long the same lines as what they offered Torre. Lower the base and raise the the incentive package. Win and get paid.

        • The Honorable Congressman Mondesi says:

          If you give the GM an incentive-based contract, you create, artificially, a situation in which that GM has incentive to treat every year like the final year of his contract. By that I mean – the incentive to win now will always be greater than the incentive to build the strongest organization possible for the long-haul. I’m not saying the incentive to win now should be marginalized, but there is certainly a balance there that an organization should attempt to maintain. When someone comes to the GM with a trade proposal like “I’ll give you X (veteran player in last year of contract) for Y and Z (top 2 prospects),” the GM’s decision shouldn’t be disproportionately influenced by a few extra dollars that may appear in his bank account.

          • steve (different one) says:

            but then Brad wouldn’t be able to draw any more analogies to his own job working for a Fortune 500 company!

            • Brad Kraus says:

              Insightful, as always……..but wrong as usual. I suppose that’s why you like here as much as you seem to. You know what they say about stupid people? Never argue with a stupid person. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience. You really got me there!!!!

          • Brad Kraus says:

            This is the Yankee’s we’re talking about. Like it or not the emphasis is always on “winning now”. Obviously that won’t happen this year and while some of the things that transpired this season were out of the control of the GM, next year the emphasis will be the same.

            When working with $175-$200 million dollar payroll you really can’t justify 3-5 year rebuilding plans. If this year taught Cashman anything it should have taught him that “youth” can’t be rushed. I don’t see an incentive laden contract changing the way the Yank’s approach trades and free agents. What I would like to see from an incentive based contract is better moves on the farm. You know like actually developing some positional players. Maybe Cashman would be less willing to sign one injury prone pitcher after another.

            The Yankees must walk a fine line between rebuilding and reloading. It would be very hard to sustain the types of payroll the Yanks have if you can’t put 3-4 million people in those seats. String together a few bad years and watch your revenue shrink as consumers find other places to spend their sports/entertainment dollars.

            • steve (different one) says:

              String together a few bad years and watch your revenue shrink as consumers find other places to spend their sports/entertainment dollars.

              luckily for Cashman and the Yankees, they were intelligent enough to time the “rebuilding” around the 2-3 years when they were basically guaranteed 4 million in attendance no matter what.

              the last year in Yankee Stadium and the first year or two in the new stadium will reap huge ticket sales almost independent of team performance.

              couple that with the $80M+ freed up this offseason, tons of potential draft picks in the 2009 draft, the best FA class in years, and a decrease in their revenue sharing bill, i don’t think it’s a coincidence that the Yankees chose 2008 as a year to “transition”.

              don’t get me wrong, they still went into this year thinking they would be at least the Wildcard, and in that respect, they failed.

              but they were also content to use this season to break in some young pitchers, let some contracts expire, break in a new coaching staff, and give the farm system one more year to mature.

            • The Honorable Congressman Mondesi says:

              “This is the Yankee’s we’re talking about. Like it or not the emphasis is always on ‘winning now’.”

              Yeah, well, you know, that’s just, like, your opinion, man. The Yankees’ track-record the last couple of seasons shows that they are balancing “winning now” against building the farm system for the long term. You may want the philosophy to be “win every year at all costs and the future be damned,” but the Yankees don’t seem to agree with you and just because it’s your opinion doesn’t make it so.

              And who said anything about a 3-5 year rebuilding plan? What the Yankees have been doing is much more akin to a reloading on the fly, they’re not selling off parts and saying “hey, it’ll be a tough 5 years and we’ll probably be in last place for a while, but in the end it’ll be worth it.” They’re in a transition period, yes, but this is certainly not a 3-5 year rebuilding plan we’re witnessing.

        • “If you fail at your job, repeatedly, would you get a 25% raise?”

          You would, if you weren’t failing.

  3. Berto says:

    95% of cashmans decisions have been disastrous……the 5% is pure luck…….this man is without question one of the dumbest human beings to ever get involved in MLB

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.