Feb
03

Yanks still interested in Hudson?

By

Via Pinto, the Yankees are apparently still interested in Orlando Hudson. He told the MLB Network that the Mets, Yanks, Dodgers, and Nationals are all interested. Furthermore, he said that he would not need to change positions. Regarding the Yankees, this sounds a bit outlandish. It would mean that they’d have to trade Robinson Cano or move him to center field, both of which aren’t attractive options.

Given the market and the total lack of interest in Hudson, this could be the player hyping himself up, using the vague term “interested” to describe his supposed suitors. In fact, I’m willing to bet that the Yankees haven’t expressed genuine interest in the second baseman since before the Winter Meetings. There’s just no place for him on the roster, especially if he’s not changing positions.

Reading the situation as presented, it seems like he’s trying to squeeze some more money and/or years out of Washington. The Yankees have Cano, the Mets have Luis Castillo, for better or for worse, and the Dodgers have Blake DeWitt. Why would any of them pony up significant years and dollars for another second baseman? In the end I don’t think any of them will. The Nationals seem like the obvious destination here — though that could change if the Dodgers don’t retain Manny Ramirez.

Categories : Hot Stove League

115 Comments»

  1. Mike says:

    Why Hudson? Where would he even play, unless you moved him to CF (and that sounds as dumb as I could think of)

    What if we signed Griffey Jr to be a bat off the bench? I always dreamed of him in pinstripes, could be like a Straw/Cecil type addition. Plus you know he wants to win…and no draft pick issues

    • Matt says:

      Yeah, I’m gonna call BS on the whole Hudson thing.

      As for Griffey, I’m pretty sure he wouldn’t be an option for a couple of reasons. 1: the Yankees need IF bench players more than OF. They already have 2 OFs who will be on the bench (the loser of the Nady/Swisher competition and Melky) and 2. I don’t think he’d sign w/the Yankees because if I recall correctly, the team didn’t exactly treat him all that great when he was a kid and his dad was on the team, and my dad told me they didn’t really treat Griffey Sr. too well.

    • Rob says:

      Cano to the Dodgers for Kemp. Yanks sign Hudson.

      Lineup:

      Damon CF
      Jeter SS
      Teixieira 1B
      A-Rod 3B
      Matsui DH
      Posada C
      Nady/Swish RF
      Hudson
      Kemp

      Now if only they signed Manny for Rf.

  2. Bill says:

    Juan Miranda easily filts that bat off the bench role. The yankee’s focus should now be to acquire a good backup IF. The kind of guy wo could start on the bottom tier teams. Maybe even trade a couple extra bullpen arms. Maybe a Jose Veras for Jeff Keppinger trade could be in the works?

  3. thisisthedavid says:

    LoL Hudson wants the yankees in negotiations.

  4. Don says:

    If the Yanks can pull of Cano for Kemp, which has been discussed before, I would drive Cano to the airport and wait for O-Dog to arrive.

    The Yanks are a far better all-around team with Kemp in CF and Hudson at 2B.

    • KW says:

      That would be the deal of a lifetime, but after last season, there can’t be a chance that’s still on, regrettably.

      • Don says:

        I wouldnt mind a Cano & Nady deal with Kemp coming back as the centerpiece.

        I think that works well for both sides. I dont think the Yanks are done, and probably wont know all the meaningful pieces until they break camp for NY.

        • steve (different one) says:

          or the Dodgers could just sign Hudson themselves and sign someone like Abreu.

          why would they give up Kemp?

          b/c we saw a rumor once that they wanted Cano?

    • Mike says:

      What if we threw in one of our extra OFs to LA to make it happen. Tell the Dodgers they can pick, we really don’t love any of them…

      My preference to get rid of in order of first to go…
      Nady
      Melky
      Gardner
      Damon
      Matsui
      Swisher

    • The Yanks are a far better all-around team with Kemp in CF and Hudson at 2B.

      I disagree. Cano at 2B and Kemp in CF is probably a wash. At first glance, Hudson at 2B and Gardner/Melky in CF seems like advantage Hudson, but remember that Gardner and Melky are about 7 years younger (and thus, can still improve), that they’re probably earning anywhere from a fifth to a tenth of what Hudson will be making, allowing us to spend those resources elsewhere, and that we still have Austin Jackson in the pipeline (as well as numerous other OF options on next year’s FA market) who can probably approximate or perhaps exceed Hudson’s value at either 2B or CF.

      I still pass.

      • Don says:

        OBP and Defense alone – it makes the Yanks better.

        Im a fan of Gardner’s, but the difference between him and Kemp compared with the difference Hudson and Cano is startling.

        • Yeah. No, wait, not at all. Totally wrong.

          Cano is average to slightly below average at 2B (Career UZR/150: -4.8).
          Hudson is average to slightly above average at 2B (Career UZR/150: +2.0).
          Kemp is below average in CF (Career UZR/150: -7.1).
          Gardner is EXCELLENT in CF (Career UZR/150: +40.2).

          Swapping Gardner/Cano for Kemp/Hudson represents a slight, if any, defensive upgrade at 2B and a massive defensive downgrade in CF. Plus, we’d need to factor in Hudson’s advancing age and injury history, which probably negates the defensive gain at 2B entirely.

          Matt Kemp is like David DeJesus and Rick Ankiel: a corner outfielder masquerading as a centerfielder.

          ———————

          As for the OBP, here’s the CHONE projections:
          Gardner: .341
          Cano: .340

          Hudson: .347
          Kemp: .353

          And, those projections are based off of Robbie’s 2008 slump and are fairly generous, IMO, to Hudson (as his OBP’s have always been much higher in the NL and at the BOB than in the AL at the Rogers Center).

          The offensive value added by Hudson/Kemp is not significant or consistent enough to offset the defensive negative. Plus the injury risk and the contractual obligations.

          Sorry, no, not convinced. Boo this. Bad Idea Jeans.

          • Don says:

            Im a numbers guy myself but if you cannot recognize the burgeoning talent that is Matt Kemp, then you haven’t watched this guy play.

            I love Gardner’s hustle, but Kemp’s offensive production will dwarf his, especially when he reaches his potential. If we were to sign Hudson, we’d essentially be replacing Cano’s contract with Hudson’s and may even be saving on the deal considering his lack of offers out there right now. Another factor is the dreaded “intangibles” quotient which Hudson certainly brings to the table, and at this point what we have seen from Cano could be best described as having negative “intangibles”.

            According to the Hardball Times, Kemp has the best CF arm in all of baseball last year. He can hold the fort in CF for 1-2 years until he potentially outgrows the position, at which point hopefully A-Jax is ready.

            He is far more athletic than Cano leading one to believe he will continue to progress, while Cano may have maxed out his talent already.

            Again this is all based on speculation, but if I had a choice of going to battle this year with Kemp and Hudson vs. Cano and Nady, Id choose the former every time.

            • Im a numbers guy myself but if you cannot recognize the burgeoning talent that is Matt Kemp, then you haven’t watched this guy play.

              I can say the exact same statement about Robinson Cano. I can also say that Cano plays his position better than Kemp plays his position, and that once Kemp rightly moves down the defensive spectrum, Cano’s bat (which is equal to Kemp’s) will remain more valuable. Oh, and he’s a lefty, and with our future offensive core looking like ARod-Jeter-Tex-AJax-Montero, his lefty bat is also more valuable than Cano’s righty bat. So, on virtually every count, I’d rather have Cano over Kemp straight up.

              I love Gardner’s hustle, but Kemp’s offensive production will dwarf his, especially when he reaches his potential.

              This is true. Similarly, I love Orlando Hudson’s hustle, but Cano’s offensive production will dwarf his, especially when he reaches his potential (and Hudson continues to have more birthdays with more than 30 candles on his cake). And, you’re still not factoring in defense: all the players we have in-house (Gardner, Melky, and AJax) are miles better than all the other players we’re discussing here.

              If we were to sign Hudson, we’d essentially be replacing Cano’s contract with Hudson’s and may even be saving on the deal considering his lack of offers out there right now.

              You continue to ignore the fact that we gave Cano that contract to buy out his arb and initial FA years, something we’d have to do for Kemp.

              Another factor is the dreaded “intangibles” quotient which Hudson certainly brings to the table, and at this point what we have seen from Cano could be best described as having negative “intangibles”.

              Ah, the “intangibles” argument… the last refuge of the man with no real points or arguments to bring to the table.

              According to the Hardball Times, Kemp has the best CF arm in all of baseball last year. He can hold the fort in CF for 1-2 years until he potentially outgrows the position, at which point hopefully A-Jax is ready.

              And, at that point, what do we do with the 2B problem you’ve created? Hudson can’t play forever… it’s always going to be easier to sign an elite young FA corner outfielder (like a Matt Kemp) than it is to sign an elite young FA second baseman (like Cano). You’re doing the baseball version of the old NBA adage of “never trade big for small”. You’re creating a bigger future problem to solve a quasi-present need.

              He is far more athletic than Cano leading one to believe he will continue to progress, while Cano may have maxed out his talent already.

              Based on one bad 2008 season with a horrible BABIP? I can’t buy into that, sorry.

              Again this is all based on speculation, but if I had a choice of going to battle this year with Kemp and Hudson vs. Cano and Nady, Id choose the former every time.

              But that’s not the true argument. It should read, should we go to war with Cano and Gardner, or should we sign Hudson, trade Cano and another piece or two for Kemp, and then start looking for long-term replacements for Hudson (who’s a stopgap) even though our most ML ready farmhand plays the very position we just “plugged” with Kemp? Should we spend more money and trade away a valuable, young, under contract lefty 2B with lots of potential for a guy who also has lots of potential but is playing out of position and is a defensive downgrade even though we already have a longterm plan for that position and plenty of equal or better alternatives at his other potential positon (corner OF)?

              Should we pull a trade that could easily backfire on us and create more long-term organizational headaches just because Orlando Hudson is available?

              It doesn’t make sense. Never did.

              • Sorry, that should say: “Oh, and he’s a lefty, and with our future offensive core looking like ARod-Jeter-Tex-AJax-Montero, his lefty bat is also more valuable than Cano’s Kemp’s righty bat.

              • Don says:

                “This is true. Similarly, I love Orlando Hudson’s hustle, but Cano’s offensive production will dwarf his, especially when he reaches his potential (and Hudson continues to have more birthdays with more than 30 candles on his cake)”

                Really – Hudson’s last 4 years of OPS/WOBA: 728/317, 809/346, 817/361, 817/359 with an 09 projection by James of 773/342

                Cano: 778/332, 890/377, 841/358, 715/307, with an 09 projection of 794/345. It is not as big a difference as you portray, plus Hudson is a switch-hitter negating your Lefty argument. I agree Hudson is on the wrong side of 30, but with the amount of attention he has gotten there is no reason to think we couldnt get him on a 2 year deal when Kelly Johnson and Rickie Weeks (both 26) become FA’s.

                When we have no OFers other than Swisher currently under contract beyond 2009, how do you solve that problem? Id much rather spend the money on another 2B in 2011 as they are known to get smaller contracts than power hitting or multi tool OFers in their prime, as we will see when Matt Holliday, Rios, and Hart become FA’s in the coming years.

                The intangibles quotient is very real, as this is not just a numbers game and if it were they wouldnt play the game and just decide the Champ based on Run Differential.

                What does BABIP have to do with athleticism? I am talking about Kemp’s ability to be a 30/30 man. Cano has no such ability and does not have an game changing skill on defense like Kemp’s arm.

                So I completely disagree that there is no argument here for a swapping of Cano for Kemp, followed by a signing of Hudson. The Yanks are always about winning now now supplemented by a new found reliance on player development. By adding the 23 y/o Kemp we would not be abandoning that movement, nor would we be doing so by signing Hudson to a 2 year deal. Would I advocate signing Hudson beyond 2 years, no I would not, especially because of the 2B becoming FAs in 2011 (including Cano)?

                However, if the Yanks played their cards right they could improve their team for this year and beyond with 2 simple moves.

                • Mike Pop says:

                  What makes you think Kemp won’t have a slump like Cano did? Cano’s 07 season was better than Kemp’s 08. Cano is great, I hate how people want to give up on him. He is a 2b and a damn good one at that, he is young and has many more years left in him than Hudson does. I had some asshole at school the other day tell me that he would trade Cano straight up for Michael Young. In my rebuttle I said, I am going to stop talking to you about baseball now.

                • I had some asshole at school the other day tell me that he would trade Cano straight up for Michael Young. In my rebuttle I said, I am going to stop talking to you about baseball now.

                  I would have pulled out a bonesaw and cut his skull open to see if there was a brain inside.

                • Mike Pop says:

                  Haha,

                  But seriously. I do think Cano is probably the 3rd most important position player on our team for the future. I don’t like the idea of trading him for Kemp at all. I do like Kemp alot but I just do not believe it is worth it.
                  Arod
                  Teix
                  Cano

                  Maybe you can make a case for Swish because he is a solid ballplayer but Cano is the man and plays a key role for the Yankees future.

      • pat says:

        Furthermore Susan, trading a young stud 2b for a guy whos gonna be a corner OF in a year or two in order to sign a guy on the tail end of his career is not the greatest decision ever.

      • The Honorable Congressman Mondesi says:

        It’s a matter of perspective. If you’re looking long-term, I agree with you, you pass on Hudson. But if you’re concerned with winning in 2009 (and throw in 2010 since I would assume Hudson’s not looking for a 1-year deal), you could certainly argue that Kemp/Hudson would be more productive than Cano/Gelky. Also… Honestly, if Hudson costs more and is less cost-efficient than Gelky, I’m not sure that matters too much to me. It’s not like you’re going to lock in Hudson for A-Rod/Tex/CC money. I haven’t put any thought into this so I don’t have any idea where I come out on this one, but I think there’s definitely a reasonable argument on both sides of this hypothetical.

      • KW says:

        I dunno, Cano has a nice sized contract, so the resource argument doesn’t really apply. At the end of the day, you’re looking at Kemp, a burgeoning (+2.8 wins last year) corner OF playing out of position in CF, but playing still passable defense, Hudson, a +2 win player vs Gardner, who was worth about 1.5 wins if projected for a year + Cano, who was worth less than 1 win, but should be worth anywhere from 2-4 wins going forward.

        It basically boils down to who’s more sure to meet their projections and improve, cano and gardner or kemp. Kemp would be more predisposed towards meeting projections just from a pure athleticism and tools standpoint (power, speed, ability to hit for average, etc). Kemp also has the ability to take over for Damon/Nady/Swisher in 2010 if they aren’t retained.

        But again, why would the Dodgers do this? They have no reason to. They can simply sign Hudson, or just do nothing and play dewitt.

        • I dunno, Cano has a nice sized contract, so the resource argument doesn’t really apply.

          And yet, we’d assuredly be keeping Kemp long term in this scenario, so that would require giving him a Canoian contract extension, so the resource argument is back to the original discrepancy between Hudson’s contract and Gardner/Melky’s peanut contracts.

          But again, why would the Dodgers do this? They have no reason to. They can simply sign Hudson, or just do nothing and play dewitt.

          And there’s the other rub here. Sure, Cano-for-Kemp may fill our internal needs better, but it makes no sense for the Dodgers, who would then need to fill their CF hole and have no FA targets capable of doing so, meaning the Dodgers would need the deal to be Kemp for Cano PLUS other pieces to make it worth their trouble.

          So, again, pass.

          • KW says:

            Again, the resource argument doesn’t really apply since there’s no guarantee of an extension for Kemp, whereas Cano has already received a lucrative extension. Following that same logic, Gardner and Melky will be due raises as well, so that reduces the financial incentive. At the end of the day, you’re asking that Cano return to 2006 and 2007 hitting levels, which may or may not be unattainable vs. Kemp’s ability to get better. Neither are a sure thing, but it looks more and more like Cano’s seasons were born of very good luck, and he does lack the natural ability of a Kemp.

            As for the Dodgers needing to fill their CF void, they have plenty of option, Eithier, Young, Pierre (not saying these are GOOD options, but they are options nonetheless). Lastly, you can’t pass because the deal doesn’t make sense for the Dodgers.

            • Again, the resource argument doesn’t really apply since there’s no guarantee of an extension for Kemp, whereas Cano has already received a lucrative extension. Following that same logic, Gardner and Melky will be due raises as well, so that reduces the financial incentive.

              No, it doesn’t. Cano and Kemp are young stud building blocks, or at least are perceived that way by their organizations. Cano was locked up because we are betting on him being a good player for a long time. We would treat Kemp the same way and view him as a good player for a long time we’d want to lock up and make part of our core.

              Gardner and Melky are not in their stratosphere; they won’t get multi-year extensions based on potential.

              We’re not going to trade away Cano for Kemp and then just let Kemp hit the open market and leave for a couple of draft picks. We’d extend him, just like Cano.

              • KW says:

                Cano was locked up to save a couple of bucks if he outperforms terrifically, taking some of the cost uncertainty out of the equation for future budgets/payrolls. If he underperforms, his contract is reasonable enough that it won’t make too much of a difference. There isn’t much hope or belief that he’ll do well, just that he’ll do well relative to what he will make for the duration of the contract.

                But, you can’t make that argument because you don’t know how the front office is going to handle it. Should they extend Kemp? Perhaps, if his performance dictated it, but until they ink him, you can’t expect that they’ll extend him for sure. No organization would allot a signifiacnt portion of their budget for such uncertainty in performance. People said the same thing about Nady and figured he may get an extension since the Yankees let Tabata go, and it didn’t happen. The point is, until they actually announce that they intend to lock him up, it’s a moot point.

            • steve (different one) says:

              Neither are a sure thing, but it looks more and more like Cano’s seasons were born of very good luck, and he does lack the natural ability of a Kemp.

              explain to me how Cano is more dependent on luck than Kemp.

              Kemp had a .417 BABIP in 2007 and .368 in 2008.

              you make it sound like Kemp walks a lot. he doesn’t.

              he’s basically the exact same hitter as Cano.

              • he’s basically the exact same hitter as Cano.

                … except he’s a righty. Which again, is huge.

                Brett Gardner is the only lefthanded bat of note in our system other than Robinson Cano signed beyond 2009.

              • KW says:

                I’d venture that they are far different hitters. Kemp had a LD% of 23% and hit .290, Cano’s was near 20% the year he hit .340, which basically means that anytime Kemp made contact, he hit it very hard, which is verifiable if you watched his games/swing. A link to fangraphs also discusses this in detail, which arrived at the conclusion that he should be able to keep up a high BABIP. Cano on the other hand may not be able to keep up his high BABIP from several years past .

                http://www.fangraphs.com/fanta.....se-of-kemp

                Also, Kemp saw nearly 300 more pitches in the same amount of ABs, which shows that despite his horridly low walk rate, he still has a selective eye and rips pitches he can hit. In other words, the pitches he takes doesn’t necessarily translate to walks.

                In any event, both clearly are young hitters, it’s just that Kemp has several things going for him: tools, youth, and progression, whereas Cano has markedly regressed in the last several years, lacks multiple tools (most notably speed), and is several years older. If the trade was on the table, do you make the deal? You’d have to. There’s way too much going for Kemp (including a lack of long term contract) not to make the deal.

  5. Rich says:

    If the Yankees are willing to spend beyond the current payroll, every dollar should be dedicated to signing Dunn. Few players are a better offensive fit for the Stadium’s dimensions.

    • Matt says:

      Sigh, if only Adam Dunn could play CF…

      • We have Posada for three more years. His two escape clauses for when he can’t catch anymore were DH and 1B. Now that Tex is on board, DH is his only remaining lifeline, meaning that we should not add any additional DH’s until Posada’s contract is clear.

        No to Dunn. (I’m willing to make an exception for Manny, but not for Dunn.)

        • Reggie C. says:

          Dunn is still a pretty young guy. He could play the OF full-time.

        • The Honorable Congressman Mondesi says:

          If Posada can’t catch any more there’s one more option you haven’t discussed. He doesn’t necessarily HAVE to be the DH. The Yanks could just lick their wounds, eat the salary, and stick the guy on the bench and he can fill-in where needed. It’s a financial decision – Do you force the guy into the lineup as the DH because you’re paying him big money, or do you throw your hands up and spend a little more to put the best lineup out there. Of course this only comes into play if Posada can’t catch and there’s a great DH option available.

          • I’m only putting Jorge on the bench if he can’t catch AND can’t hit. As long as he can still swing the bat, he’s a fine DH.

            • The Honorable Congressman Mondesi says:

              Hypothetical: Jorge can’t throw, and the Yankees know this going into the 2009-2010 offseason. In a couple of weeks Manny signs a one-year deal with the Dodgers, has a great 2009 season, and will be a free agent after the 2009 season. Posada puts up 2009 stats similar to his 2006 numbers and will be going into his age 38 season in 2010. Do you go after Manny?

              • Yes. As I said above, for Adam Dunn, I’m not benching Jorge Posada; I’m going to trot Posada out there for two more years at DH and live with his production. I will not make an exception to our long term roster flexibility plan for Adam Dunn (even though he’s good).

                I will make an exception for Manny.

                Although, in that scenario, what I’d probably do is leave Jorge at DH, let Damon/Matsui/Nady walk, and sign Manny to play LF. (Yeah, he sucks in the field, but not as bad as Dunn…)

                SS Jeter R
                RF Swisher S
                3B ARod R
                1B Tex S
                LF Manny R
                DH Posada S
                2B Cano L
                CF Gardner/Jackson L/R
                C ?????? R

                • The Honorable Congressman Mondesi says:

                  “Yes. As I said above, for Adam Dunn, I’m not benching Jorge Posada; I’m going to trot Posada out there for two more years at DH and live with his production. I will not make an exception to our long term roster flexibility plan for Adam Dunn (even though he’s good). I will make an exception for Manny.”

                  Eh, yeah, I was busy and wasn’t reading all the comments above. Never mind me.

                • Eh, yeah, I was busy and wasn’t reading all the comments above. Never mind me.

                  … and you wanna be my latex salesman.
                  (shakes head)

  6. Casey says:

    Sorry Yankee Fans, but Yanks are not allowed to sign anymore type A free agents.
    Ha Ha
    Source:
    http://mlb.mlb.com/news/articl.....8;c_id=mlb

  7. Mike says:

    Who are the OF’s that you think are untradable my list:

    Sizemore
    Hamilton
    Braun
    Markakis

    Who would you guys add?

  8. A.D. says:

    This would make sense if the Yankees have really soured on Cano, could trade him for Kemp, and then see their future of as:

    Kemp, Gardner/AJAX, Swisher…. which isn’t bad at all… but the Yankees, as of right now don’t really have some 2B prospect that they want to make room for in the near future.

  9. Lloyd Johnson says:

    CANO and MELKY to the Dodgers for KEMP. THen we sign HUDSON. Now all problems are solved. Whats so hard about this? Either that.. we Re-Sign Abrue quickly. Right now we have the worst Outfield in baseball, and nothing on the bench.

  10. Mike Pop says:

    I think he is just saying they expressed interest. Everyone knows the Yanks don’t want him now.

  11. Kilgore Trout says:

    If landing hudson means parting with Cano I hate it. I also hate hudson in center. I don’t hate the idea of adding a solid utility infielder who likes the role a la omar infante. He’s locked up for 2 years at a low cost. If Nady gets traded I’d like to see him land a guy like this plus a minor league arm.

    • Mike Pop says:

      Give me Kelly Johnson. I’ll take him to be my utility guy.

      • Kilgore Trout says:

        Who wouldn’t want Kelly Johnson as a utility guy. It’s unrealistic. What we have worries me. If Jeter/Arod or Cano go on the 15 day pavano I don’t want to see Ransom/Berroa play for the 15 days. I like both of them as a backup to the utility guy.

        • Mike Pop says:

          I hear ya but that is what I would ask for X from the Braves. Since Schafer seems unrealistic, I would want at least Kelly. I would be able to expand the deal to make it happen if need be.

  12. JeffG says:

    Matt posted above saying that we are going to carry two OFs on the bench. I don’t think that will be the case.

    ST is going to be interesting as I think odd man out of the CF race is either traded (Melky) let go (Melky) or sent down (Bret). A typical bull pen is seven spots and that leaves room for four bench players. Molina leaves three spots – so you can’t give two away to OF especially considering Matsui is also an OFer.

    I still have a feeling that Cameron isn’t totally out of the picture. I don’t mind us having both Nady and Swisher but I would rather see a trade that could bring someone back to soldify CF or at least clear some money to aquire a legit CFer.

    • Bo says:

      Clear money? In what world are you living?

      If the Indians offered Sizemore right now would they need to clear money?

      Dont get the obession with this whole “payroll must be the same or less” thing. The Yankees one huge advantage is revenue. Use it.

      • JeffG says:

        I’m living in the world that saw us haggle with Pettitte for three months until they finally settled on a contract with 5.5M guaranteed…

        I would personally love to see the Yanks spend 250M on payroll so they can sign Manny have Matsui as nice bench bat. Perhaps sign Hudson for Util IF spot. Maybe make a trade for Wells or Beltran while were at it.

        I just don’t get the sense that Cashman is inclined to raise our payroll that much more to start the season. Call me crazy.

      • steve (different one) says:

        of course the Yankees would make an exception for Sizemore.

        that however, is outside the realm of all possibility, so i don’t see the relevance.

        the question is whether or not they would make an exception for someone like Cameron.

        which they may not be willing to do.

        b/c he’s not as good as Sizemore.

        makes sense to me.

    • Tom Zig says:

      Im satisfied with Gardner/Melky and their underwhelming bats but above-average defense. Our lineup could carry one of the two of them in the #9 spot.

      So are Nady/Swisher going to battle it out in ST for RF? Or are the Yanks just deciding to go with one over the other?

  13. BP says:

    You forgot another option of moving Jeter to left, and Cano to short, Damon would be the CF, and Melky and Gardner can ride the bench and fill in every now and then

  14. mustang says:

    I agree with Joseph on this, but here is some food for thought. The Yankees in the past had been rumored to have interest in Pittsburgh Pirates CF Nate McLouth. At the time the Pirates said that Cano would not be enough, but after not being able to sign Nate McLouth to an extension I wonder if that might change.
    So what we would be looking at here is Cano for McLouth and using the Cano money to sign a cheaper Hudson. This again is a theory based on very old rumors on the Tues following the Super Bowl.
    God I can’t wait for the season to start.
    LOL

  15. [...] middle infielder. Plus, he doesn’t cost the signing team a draft pick. If there are any teams actually interested in Orlando Hudson, I don’t know why they wouldn’t look to Grudz [...]

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.