Dec
10

Yanks close on Lowe

By

Many here at RAB, me included, aren’t too excited about the prospect of signing Derek Lowe to any kind of contract, never mind a four-year deal. Yet, that appears to be close. Via MLBTR, we hear that the Yanks are/were discussing a four-year deal with the free agent righty. He was on WFAN this morning, where he said the Yanks are closing in. Clearly, the Yanks are tending to bigger matters, both figuratively and literally, right now. Lowe could clearly be next, though.

At that point, Sheets makes even more sense over Burnett. Why sign three pitchers to seven, five, and four-year contracts? Seven, four, and two sounds much easier to swallow.

Categories : Asides

68 Comments»

  1. A.D. says:

    Hopefully Lowe means no Burnett, and if that’s the case this works for me.

    Maybe if Mo retires after the end of his contract they put Lowe back to close!

    • mustang says:

      “Hopefully Lowe means no Burnett, and if that’s the case this works for me.”

      Agree, but still 4 years at 66 million Holy Shit.

    • Chris C. says:

      Is Lowe bringing Chavez Ravine with him? If he’s not, he’s a 36 year old pitcher with an ERA between 4.00 and 5.50.
      Thrilling.

    • Chris C. says:

      Good Lord. If the Yankees have no better option to close at that time than Derek Lowe, then the Yankee system is REEEEALLLY crappy!

  2. Chip says:

    When somebody comes out and confirms it, then I’ll start buying into it.

  3. Reggie C. says:

    Max Kellerman is making the case for Ben Sheets right now on ESPN radio.

  4. RJ - CT says:

    I’d be fine with just Sheets, and no Lowe or Burnett.
    Will annoy me if Hughes doesn’t have a legit shot at rotation.

  5. Jacob says:

    If we get C.C. and Sheets, do we really even need Lowe? I’d rather bring Petitte back for a year to keep the seat warm for Hughes or IPK. I want the Yanks to give Lowe a 4 year deal about as much as I want them to give Burnett a 5 year deal. This just seems like a bad deal all the way around and I really don’t get the logic. I guess it’s safe to assume that if we do indeed offer Lowe 4 years, and Sheets 2 that Petitte will not be coming back.

  6. jsbrendog says:

    seriously, if they sign lowe then youbhave lowe cc and wang going forward, and if they sign sheets that leaves either hughes joba out until one of those contrascts ends…it doesnt make sense unless theyre looking to trade wanger….

    • Matt says:

      Cashman has said that Chamberlain will be a starter. However, he’s still going to have an innings limit, so he and Hughes will probably trade starts. With what you’ve proposed the rotation would look like this:

      CC
      Wang
      Lowe
      Sheets
      Joba/Hughes/whoever

      Signing Lowe and Sheets means not signing Pettitte. I’d prefer to sign Sheets and Pettitte. How do you get trading Wang out of that?

      • jsbrendog says:

        because after theis year whe their innings limits go up to normal rates you are still left with cc wang lowe and sheets all under contract and then you have joba and hughes. one gets left out. what then? one of them toils in the minors for 2 mroe years til someone’s contract expires? the only thing i can see making sense is trading someone, and wang is the one who comes to mind cause he is still arbitration eligible isnt he? going yr to yr?

        • jsbrendog says:

          addition” and proven where joba and hughes are still “prospects” (using the temr loosely)

          • Matt says:

            I see what you mean. Well, if they sign Lowe, I don’t think they’ll go for Sheets. That way, they can have Pettitte for one more year only and the rotation in 2010 will be some combination of Sabathia/Joba/Wang/Hughes/Lowe.

            They would definitely not trade Wang unless something spectacular came out of it (read: Pujols, Lincecum, Hamels, Hanley, Impossible) because that would hurt the long term viability of the rotation.

            • jsbrendog says:

              oh im not advocating it im just saying were they to sign all 3 wang is the thing that would bring back the biggest return, and with that surplus of pitching they might see what they could get. wang could bring back top flight positional prospects which we have none of. just speculation and conjecture, not sayigi want to trade wang cause i dont

              • Matt says:

                I gotcha. I don’t think they’ll sign all 3 of those guys, though. It wouldn’t make sense long term.

                Signing Lowe for four years doesn’t make much long term sense either, but signing Sheets/Lowe/Pettitte along with CC doesn’t make sense at all.

      • Chris C. says:

        “However, he’s still going to have an innings limit, so he and Hughes will probably trade starts.”

        Could anyting possibly be dumber than this?? So the Yankees are going to have Phil Hughes sitting around for 9 days between each start? I highly doubt that arrangement will take place.

        But after signing Derek Lowe, who’s splits are terrible outside of his home park, for over 16 mill a year, anything’s possible I suppose.

  7. radnom says:

    This is stupid. We got CC, we have the reliable starter. There is no need to be persuing Lowe anymore. Get one more arm you can count on for a much better deal (Pettite) and then go high risk/high reward with Sheets.

    The only justification I could see for persuing Lowe would be if CC didn’t sign.

    • jsbrendog says:

      unfortunately this is probably a stop the red sox from asigning him…even more unfortunately like i said it sucks and doens’t make sense for the long term good of the team

      • radnom says:

        I seriously doubt that.

        You don’t sign a 66 million dollar contract for a guy you don’t want to keep him away from another team.
        And the Sox don’t need a starter that badly anyway, I would be surprised if they were seriously in on Lowe considering the prices being tossed around.

        • Furthermore, the Sox signing Lowe would be a good thing. I’d like to see them tie up more of their resources in another aging pitcher for four more years. Leaves them with less Teixeira money.

          • Chris C. says:

            The Red Sox are too smart to do something like that.
            You think Theo Epstein gives a rats ass if the Yankees bring in Derek Lowe?

            He’ll get lit up like a Christmas tree in the AL. He couldn’t even pitch well in the NL on the road!

            A year or two from now, we’ll be hearing “the Yankees may get a decent prospect back if they eat up a large portion of Lowe’s contract”.

            Cashman stinks. I know you like him Tommie, and he does talk a good game and has a good plan at heart, but at the end of the day, none of that matters. Lowe is a complete waste of money.

            And with Sabathia, geez! I’m glad they got the guy and all, but they had the highest offer on the table already BY FAR, and he still couldn’t land the guy without adding another year, another 20 mill, and an opt-out clause after year 3!
            What a shrewd negotiator!

            You just knew the Yankees were ready to outbid themselves for Sabathia when you heard they were sending in Reggie Jackson to meet with him. How desperate must you be to send that clown in to do your work?

            • Chris, you do know that I was saying in my comment that I wanted the RED SOX to sign Lowe and not us, right? Did you misread that? You seem to be saying that the Red Sox wouldn’t care if we signed Lowe, which I agree with. I was saying that I wanted the Red Sox to sign Lowe instead of us signing him, as it would make them a bit less likely to go after Tex (as well as, I don’t want Lowe.)

              • Chris C. says:

                “Chris, you do know that I was saying in my comment that I wanted the RED SOX to sign Lowe and not us, right?”

                Yes, I did know you were saying that. I would have liked for that to happen too, just to keep Cashman from making a fool of himself. But that was never going to happen. As much as I want the Red Sox to act like they used to back in the day, they just don’t anymore.

                “You seem to be saying that the Red Sox wouldn’t care if we signed Lowe, which I agree with. I was saying that I wanted the Red Sox to sign Lowe instead of us signing him, as it would make them a bit less likely to go after Tex (as well as, I don’t want Lowe.)”

                Yup, I knew exactly what you were saying, and couldn’t agree more. But there’s simpl no way on Earth Boston would say, “okay, we got Derek Lowe back for a ton of money. I guess that’s enough of this going after Mark Teixeira nonsense”.

                I hate to say it, but moving forward, we really have to assume that the Boston Red Sox are a smart organization until they prove differently. I know, it’s blasphemy to compliment them, but just look at how they’ve set themselves up moving forward? You have to be a little envious of their patience and foresight.

                • You have to be a little envious of their patience and foresight.

                  Waiting to deal Manny for pennies on the dollar only after he was willing to quit on the team to get what he wanted, and being hamstrung with the Mike Lowell and David Ortiz contracts the year that Mark Teixeira hits the market both say hello.

                • Chris C. says:

                  You’ve got to be kidding.

                  First of all, Jason Bay was no slouch for a guy you were desperate to get rid of, considering they couldn’t give him away on waivers two years prior.

                  And David Ortiz’s contract does not hamstring them. He is worth his money.

                  And Lowell was a great acquisition for someone who’s contract they HAD TO take if they wanted Becket.

                  How are they hamstrung with that, when Ramirez’ freight just came off their payroll?

                  Try this one on for size……….even with the Yankees shedding over 80 mill from their payroll, they are STILL the highest payrolled team in the majors. And you’d be scared to death to go into next season without them making any moves.
                  So they could have had the highest payroll in baseball next year, and be picked to finish 4th in a 5 team division next season.

                  Say hello to THAT!

      • Chris C. says:

        “unfortunately this is probably a stop the red sox from asigning him…”

        Yeah, sure. The Red Sox, who have a solid staff, were looking to hand out a multi-year 8 digit/yr. deal to a guy they tossed from their rotation in his prime. That’s exatly what Theo Epstein was aiming to do.

    • Chris C. says:

      Cashman ALWAYS follows a solid signing with a stupid deal.
      His adrenaline gets pumping.

      • Cashman ALWAYS follows a solid signing with a stupid deal.

        Such as? I’m not calling bullshit on you, just curious as to what good signing/bad signing combos you’re specifically referring to in your inner monologue.

        • Joop says:

          I’ll call bullshit, if you won’t.

        • Chris C. says:

          SOLID SIGNING: Carl Pavano (yes it was.)
          STUPID SIGNING: Jaret Wright.

          SOLID TRADE: Nady/Marte.
          STUPID TRADE: IROD.

          SOLID SIGNING: Andy Pettitte (2006)
          STUPID SIGNING: Kei Igawa.

          SOLID SIGNINGS: Bowa and Pena.
          STUPID SIGNINGS: Farnsworth and Damon.

          SOLID TRADE: Abreu.
          STUPID TRADE: Craig Wilson.

          SOLID SIGNING: Arb to Lieber, El Duque.
          STUPID SIGNING: Tony Womack.

          SOLID SIGNING: Mariano Rivera.
          STUPID SIGNING: LaTroy Hawkins.

          SOLID SIGNING: Robby Cano to affordable deal.
          STUPID, GOOFY, EMBARASSING SIGNING: Billy Crystal.

          and……

          SOLID SIGNING: CC Sabathia
          STUPID SIGNING: Derek Lowe.

          • Chris C. says:

            ………..

            SOLID TRADE: Mondesi
            STUPID TRADE: Weaver.

            SOLID SIGNING: Matsui
            STUPID SIGNING: Contreras.

            You may or may not argue the validity in a few of these, but the timelines are impeccably accurate.
            Cashman, after making solid moves, suddenly gets excited, impulsive, and hasty.

            • You may or may not argue the validity in a few of these, but the timelines are impeccably accurate. Cashman, after making solid moves, suddenly gets excited, impulsive, and hasty.

              I’m not going to argue the validity of most of those, although I could (Craig Fucking Wilson? Are you serious? How fucking petty can you be with your dislike of another man?). I’m also not going to detail the well-established fact that for the majority of Cashman’s tenure he was not the only decision maker in the room, and that he was often overridden.
              What I will say is this: Name me three GM’s who would have been any different than Brian Cashman as GM of the Yankees. Most of these “bad” signings or trades you list, everybody else was in on them too. Golden Boy Theo Epstein was hard-charging for Jose Contreras just like Cashman was. Jeff Weaver was hailed as the next great strikeout king who was only being held back from true dominance by being on a bad team. Team after team has been tempted by Jaret Wright’s ability over and over. I’m not saying Cashman’s perfect, never have. What I am saying is most of the Cashman criticism is disingenuous because it’s either silly, inconsequential nitpicking over non-essential players (like LaTroy Hawkins, who was totally a low-low risk gamble that every single team does constantly and who no GM should ever, ever be bashed for) or it’s revisionist spin trying to proclaim that everybody knew going into said player acquisition that it wouldn’t work, distorting the historical record that most teams desired the same busts that we did, and that ultimately, Cashman will probably have more blood on his hands than his peers because our superior budget not only allows us to take more gambles (and thus, have more failures), but our business model practically demands it.

              • Chris C. says:

                “I’m also not going to detail the well-established fact that for the majority of Cashman’s tenure he was not the only decision maker in the room, and that he was often overridden”

                True……but this stuff is on his watch. There’s no way of knowing what the did or didn’t do.

                “Golden Boy Theo Epstein was hard-charging for Jose Contreras just like Cashman was.”

                The Yankees wanted him because the Red Sox did. That’s a bullshit way to operate. Is that really the plan from the get-go?

                “Jeff Weaver was hailed as the next great strikeout king who was only being held back from true dominance by being on a bad team.”

                No, VAZQUEZ was very good on a bad team. Weaver was okay. And on top of that, he had just gotten busted on the team plain with a bag of weed. And the Yankees dealt a lefty with potential and two top round picks for him? Not eveyone was on board with this.
                What held Tim Lincicum or Jake Peavy back from being dominant on bad teams? Nothing.

                “I’m not saying Cashman’s perfect, never have.”

                He gets way too much credit for being a top flight GM. As soon as he made an effort to revive the farm system, people started acting like he was splitting the atom.
                I’m sure the guy is bright…….but sometimes he just does things that make you scratch your head.

                “Team after team has been tempted by Jaret Wright’s ability over and over.”

                Which makes a multi-year deal silly. And everyone in baseball knew that Wright’s shiney year was a product of Leo Mazzone.

                “….. or it’s revisionist spin trying to proclaim that everybody knew going into said player acquisition that it wouldn’t work”

                Okay……….I’m telling you right now……..Derek Lowe will either be an expensive flop on the mound, or run into injuries due to age. His splits and his age don”t lie.
                So when that happens, I’m not revising history…..just so you know.

                “Cashman will probably have more blood on his hands than his peers because our superior budget not only allows us to take more gambles….”

                The key word being “allows”. This does not REQUIRE him to take gambles. In fact, if the farm system had been better developed over the past 8 years instead of just the past 2 or 3, he woudln’t have to. GM’s take gambles for 2 reasons…….1, they have holes as a result of possible past mistakes, and 2, they can’t trust any of their young guys to fill them.

                “…….but our business model practically demands it.”

                Any business model that demands that you spend money for the simple reason that alot is coming in, and not neccesarily for the health of the product long-term, may be a model worth revising. Wouldn’t the best kind of business model be one predicated on having the most success while spending the least amount of company funds to have it?

                • Any business model that demands that you spend money for the simple reason that alot is coming in, and not neccesarily for the health of the product long-term, may be a model worth revising. Wouldn’t the best kind of business model be one predicated on having the most success while spending the least amount of company funds to have it?

                  We’re not spending money simply because it’s coming in, we’re spending money because we can, and it offers a tactical advantage.

                  That’s all I was saying.

                • Chris C. says:

                  “We’re not spending money simply because it’s coming in, we’re spending money because we can, and it offers a tactical advantage.”

                  There’s nothing “tactical” about throwing so much money at someone, they can’t say no. In fact, the only guy using any kind of “tactics” in this process was Sabathia.
                  Seems that every FA in the world now knows the Yankees will eventually blink.
                  The guy actually has an opt-out after 3 years!!!!
                  So for all that money, he may NOT be a long term solution. Unless he stinks. THEN he’s here for the long haul.

                  And spending money “because you can” also provides you with roster inflexiblity if you’re wrong.

                  Being able to secure your target is great, provviding you’ve already built a solid core in which that player is complimenting.
                  But this is just a case of throwing mad money at the top 5 or 6 free agents. There’s nothing tactical about that.

                  Don’t get me wrong……..I like Sabathia. He won’t be worthy of the entire length of his deal, but I like him anyway for the next few years.

                  But if Cashman brings in Sabathia, Lowe, Sheets, and Teixeira by blowing everyone out of the water financially, would you call him a “tactical genius”?

  8. Simon says:

    Can he be effective in AL? Why are we getting the Sox’s “sloppy seconds?” (cheap shot at mr. avery)

  9. Reggie C. says:

    Rotoworld:
    Jon heyman reports that the Yanks are close to signing Lowe to a 4 year deal worth b/w $68 and $72 Million. The RS supposedly don’t want to go beyond 3 years.

  10. MS says:

    Why do we want Burnett (17 mil) and Lowe (15 mil) instead of Sheets (13-14 mil for 2 years) and Tex (20 mil). I want Sheets and Tex and let Petitte take the 10 mil. or retire. CC, Wang, Joba, Sheets, and Hughes is fine with me especially if we have Tex in our lineup.

    • Jacob says:

      Agree 100%

    • Ed says:

      The problem with having both Joba and Hughes in the rotation is if they’re pitching well, they’ll hit their innings caps towards the end of the season and have to be shut down. And if they’re not pitching well, Kennedy and Igawa are your fallbacks.

      • Chris C. says:

        Kei Igawa????? What, you don’t like Alfredo Aceves as a fallback? Am I missing something? Did he do something wrong when he got his shot this season, or you didn’t notice him without a big pricetag on his forehead?

  11. Michael says:

    Here is the way i look at it:

    *(barring injury/trade etc)

    2008
    #1 (didnt have a true ace)
    #2 Wang
    #3 Mussina (200 innings)
    #4 Pettitte (200 innings)
    #5 Joba (innings limit)

    ——————————————————–
    2009
    #1 CC
    #2 Wang
    #3 Burnett/Sheets/Lowe
    #4 Pettitte (last year of contract)
    #5 Joba (innings Limit)

    2010
    #1 CC
    #2 Wang
    #3 IF: Sheets (last year of contract) or Burnett/Lowe
    #4 Joba
    #5 Hughes (innings limit)

    2011
    #1 CC
    #2 Wang
    #3 Joba
    #4 Hughes
    #5 IF: Sheets was signed in ’08, Brackman/minor leaguer/free agent
    if not: Burnett / Lowe

    2012
    #1 CC
    #2 Joba
    #3 Wang
    #4 Hughes
    #5 IF: Sheets was signed in ’08, Brackman/minor leaguer/free agent
    if not: Burnett/ Lowe (last year of contract if no 5th year option)/ Lowe (last of contract)

    ——————————————————-

    Conclusion:

    If Pettitte returns: Sign one of the three

    Signing Burnett might be a better option in the short term, but hurts rotation flexibility the most out of the Burnett/Lowe/Sheets. Best case scenario maybe that he is out of the AL East.

    Signing Lowe provides more rotation stability if he pitches well, but also hurts the rotation flexibility toward the end of his contact assuming they dont move him to the bullpen.

    Signing Sheets provides a good short term option and the best rotation flexibility for someone like Brackman to step in.

    If Pettitte doesnt return: Sign Lowe plus one of either Burnett/Sheets

    Sign Lowe to replace one of Mussina/Pettitte’s innings and hope for a effective, healthy Burnett or Sheets.

    • DonnieBaseballHallofFame aka they guy who has well documented history of belligerent thickheadedness and anti-intellectual character assassinations says:

      Good post.

      “Signing Burnett might be a better option in the short term, but hurts rotation flexibility the most out of the Burnett/Lowe/Sheets. Best case scenario maybe that he is out of the AL East.”

      If he is going to go to Atlanta LET him GO Cashman! If Lowe is going to go to the Sox LET him GO! If Cash is just driving up the price for Boston I like it, if we actually sign either of these pitchers to a 4 or 5 year deal its HORRIBLE if Ben Sheets can be had for two years and 35 mill or less.

    • A.D. says:

      If Hughes has a full season of minor league ball this year it may not be an innings limit in ’10. But that’s really just nitpicking

  12. DonnieBaseballHallofFame aka they guy who has well documented history of belligerent thickheadedness and anti-intellectual character assassinations says:

    Cashman you boob! Anybody can sign players for more years and the most dollars. STOP OUTBIDDING YOURSELF!

  13. Mike W. says:

    A rotation of CC, Wang, Joba, Lowe, Sheets would be SICK but it makes me wonder what they are doing with Phil Hughes and IPK if so. If the Yanks tie that many years into free agents, does that mean that Hughes is going to get traded for a young bat? I would think so..

    • MR. LLOYD says:

      Lowe makes sense,

      The guy has pitched less than 2,000 innings his entire career (only been starter since ’02), is as durable and reliable as any pitcher in baseball, will guarantee you 200 innings/year, and but for ’04 – has put up very good numbers nearly every year.

      Burnett is a major risk and has only won more than 12 games ONCE in his career – thanks but no thanks. Lowe is a more “sure thing” and you can depend on him to be a horse for you all year. The Yankees havent had that in a lonnng time (See Kevin Brown, Randy Johnson, Pavano, Hughes, Pettitte. Jared Wright – you get the point).

      Also like Sheets for 2 years/30 mil.

      And in regards to Hughes and IPK, who cares if they cant get a legitimate shot in the rotation this year – they wont be able to pitch a full season anyway? They should both stay down in AAA all year and build up their arm strength, innings count, and confidence.

    • Chris C. says:

      Simply put, the Yankees will never learn that you can’t operate like this and win a championship……..if that’s the way thay choose to go.

      All they’re doing is replacing the overpaid guys who left with other guys who will be overpaid before long.

      I’ll guarentee you this: The Yankees will end up HOPING and WISHING that Sabathia exercises his opt-out after year 3. They have paid absolutely no mind to the amount of innings on his arm already, or the physical shape he’s in. They have become a really desperate organization during the last two winter meetings. AROD and Sabathia have made them look like fools.

  14. nick blasioli says:

    do you all think the yankees got better when they signed cc….??? it he wins twenty games ,,,that takes the place of mussinas twenty…what about abreu and giambis out put…i like the idea of pettite and sheets….that would make the team a hell of alot better…..

  15. Joseph M says:

    What a waste of money! The Lowe market should be 24 to 26 million for two years ( I still don’t want him but that’s his value).

    • Chris C. says:

      That sounds about right.

      Let this sink into your head……….by the time the Yankees convince Derek Lowe to sign, he could be the third highest paid pitcher in baseball. Let me repeat that louder………

      DEREK LOWE COULD BE THE THIRD HIGHEST PAID PITCHER IN BASEBALL!

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.