Could the Yanks keep all three free agents?


When discussing the pending free agencies of Hideki Matsui and Johnny Damon, the refrain all season long was that the Yankees would probably keep one and cut loose the other. On the surface, that seemed to make sense. Both players will be 36 next year, so they don’t fit with the Yankees’ supposed plan to get younger. Yet they’re both productive players, so holding onto one makes sense.

The problem is of replacing production. The Yankees got a lot out of Matsui and Damon, and it’s unlikely that an internal candidate could replace their production. In 2009 Nick Swisher and Mark Teixeira replaced Jason Giambi and Bobby Abreu. But if the Yankees are leaning away from entering another long-term contract, who will replace Matsui or Damon?

The answer, as Joel Sherman notes this morning, could be themselves. Not only that, but they’re looking for a way to retain all three of their major free agents, which includes Andy Pettitte. Sherman quotes a team executive, who says, “I hope we can figure out a way to have them all back.” According to the exec, the Yankees are more focused on those guys than external free agents.

This makes sense to me. No, retaining all three veterans would not make the Yankees younger, but getting younger for the sake of getting younger is not a productive strategy. The Yankees need offensive output and solid pitching, and their own guys can provide that. Why go out on the market when the solution stands right before you?

The key to bringing back all three is getting them on one-year deals. That doesn’t seem to be a problem for Pettitte, who will likely only want a one-year deal anyway, and Matsui, who enters a free agent market flooded with DH types. It’s unlikely another team would give Matsui multiple years, so his return to New York could come at one year and a reduction to his $13 million 2009 salary. For Pettitte, it could be a one-year deal at perhaps double his $5.5 million 2009 base salary. If the Yankees bring him back, I doubt it will be a heavily incentivized deal.

Damon is a bit tougher a case. His defense declined markedly in 2009, and at his age it’s tough to call that a blip. He could certainly recover in 2010 — he was, after all, one of the top devensive left fielders in 2008 — but that’s not a given. Still, his bat is still valuable, especially in Yankee Stadium, and his postseason run shows that is season-ending slump isn’t too big a worry. Another team might be willing to offer Damon more years and money than the Yankees, though again I’m not sure other teams will be so apt to take the risk on an older player.

The Yankees could find themselves in a good position in these three negotiations. Bringing back Matsui, Damon, an Pettitte on one-year deals, perhaps one plus and option for Damon, seems like the best possible solution this off-season. That brings little risk to the Yankees, since these are short deals. It also reduces payroll because Damon and Matsui would not make the $13 million they did in 2009. The Yankees could then use their remaining resources elsewhere, rather than tying up money in a long-term contract for a player in his 30s, or trading prospects to fill a hole.

Getting younger is nice, but it is not a goal unto itself. The idea behind it is to get more flexible and more durable. The Yankees, however, could bring back these three veterans and still have a strong club for 2010. There aren’t many, if any, better options on the market that don’t come with their own sets of risk. I think it’s a good idea to bring back the guys they know, conserve their resources, and reassess after the 2010 season.

Categories : Hot Stove League


  1. A.D. says:

    The issue is if you don’t resign these guys, its either going to cost a lot more for similar production, or you’re going to get worse production.

    On the DH front they could probably go after Thome if they don’t sign Damon, but in terms of a starter to replace Pettitte or a LF to replace Damon, you’re either going to pay way more, for younger similar or better production, or pay the same to less for worse production.

  2. chriskeo says:

    Keeping all three guys could be part of the long term of getting younger and reducing payroll. The one year deals essentially keeps the team the same and almost puts off longer-term desicions until after the 2010 season.

  3. If I’m Cashman, I list the three in order of priority as:

    1. Pettitte
    2. Matsui
    3. Damon

    I list Matsui over Damon because I think his power output at DH would likely outweigh Damon’s. Despite his knee problems, I think Matsui’s more well rested/in possibly better condition than Damon, since ‘Dek didn’t have to play the field at all in ’09. However, if Damon is brought back and not Matsui, I’d prefer Damon to be the DH and bring in another outfielder, such as Mike Cameron or maybe Marlon Byrd, to play center and shift Melky to left. In that scenario, I’d prefer Cameron because I believe in his power more. His bat would play very nicely in CF and I think it could counter-balance Melky’s lack of a bat in LF.

  4. Bo says:

    Since when is strong LF defense a key to winning titles? Damon, Burrel, Manny, etc etc. God knows the Yankees had a rotating squad of avg players out there in the late 90′s.

    Damons bat certainly makes up for any defensive liabilities. Getting younger for the sake of getting younger isnt a good strategy. Especially if they feel that Crawford in 2010 makes more sense than Holliday or Bay now.

    • But, realistically, what are the chances Damon can repeat that season with the bat? Guys who have career years this late in their careers usually don’t have an encore performance of that.

      Bringing up the ’90s is also a little off because those teams were able to outweigh the lack of offense in left because of great offense at CF and SS. The Yankees don’t have great offense out of CF anymore, and despite Jeter’s awesome year, we shouldn’t be counting on that again.

      Chances are Damon does not repeat what he did in 2009. Combined with bad defense, the probable decline from 2009 will hurt the Yankees.

    • Since when is strong LF defense a key to winning titles?

      Since when does a statement like that matter at all to anyone about anything?

      That’s a red herring.

  5. The Honorable Congressman Mondesi says:

    “Getting younger is nice, but it is not a goal unto itself. The idea behind it is to get more flexible and more durable. The Yankees, however, could bring back these three veterans and still have a strong club for 2010. There aren’t many, if any, better options on the market that don’t come with their own sets of risk. I think it’s a good idea to bring back the guys they know, conserve their resources, and reassess after the 2010 season.”

    This. I couldn’t agree more with this post. We’ll see how things shake out, and of course we have no idea what the trade market will bring this offseason, but given the information we have, as fans, right now, I’m all for this plan.

    I’ve had similar thoughts recently, some of which I posted in this thread. Here’s a short bit I’ll restate here:

    “I think a lot of people got so used to the idea of saying ‘Damon and Matui are gone, the Yanks want to get younger and they command big contracts’ without thinking about what happens if/when, in all likelihood, at least one if not both of them are looking at 1-2 year offers. An older player isn’t always a bad thing to have, it’s only a bad thing to have when he’s signed to too many years, makes too much money, blocks another player, hurts flexibility, etc.”

    If the Yanks determine that Damon’s not about to fall off a cliff and Matsui’s knees will hold-up as a DH, and if either or both of them can be had on 1 year deals (or 1 + of some sort, to be determined), I think the best strategy this offseason is to just bring them back, go into 2010 with a very strong team, and, to use TSJC’s oft-used saying, kick the can down the road another year or two before having to make any big moves with those slots on the roster.

  6. Jake H says:

    I would bring back Andy and Godzilla on 1 year deals. Damon 2 years. This would give A-Jax to develop more in AAA so that he could take over in center for Melky.

  7. Señor A. Boy says:

    You guys disagree with Nomaas!

    • Andy in Sunny Daytona says:

      OH NOES!!1111! Not Nomaas.

    • The Honorable Congressman Mondesi says:

      Yeah, but they didn’t really say what their plan would be, did they? It’s all well and good to say that the Yanks should get younger, but how should they do that? Let Damon and Matsui walk and replace them with… who?

      What I think they’re missing is that re-signing these guys for another year doesn’t make the Yanks older in the sense we used to bemoan. They don’t clog up the roster, they actually create flexibility by allowing the team to plug in productive players with little time-commitment and a lower financial commitment than in the past. They’re a stopgap, and sure, they’re a risk since they’re older and have their health issues, but I think you actually do get younger by signing them in that you kick the can down the road to 2010 or 2011, when the prospects should be ready to step in and when the free agent classes will be much stronger than in 2009. In the long-term, I think signing Damon/Matsui actually gives you the opportunity to get younger. You have to think past 2010.

      Or maybe they have some great ideas over there they just haven’t shared with us yet, who knows.

  8. I agree. Bringing Pettitte back is a no-brainer, but bringing both Damon and Matsui back on 1 year deals or 1+1 deals is also the smartest move when you consider all alternatives.

    The only LF/DH strategy I can endorse other than bringing back both Damon and Matsui is bringing back one of the two and signing Mike Cameron to a 1 year deal for the other spot. Cameron represents a downgrade offensively from both Damon and Matsui, but his far superior defense makes him a net production equal to Damon and Matsui, IMO, and he would give us some flexibility as he can play not only LF and DH but also CF as well.

    To be frank, signing all three wouldn’t be a bad idea either (although that kinda entails killing Brett Gardner’s career, since there would barely be enough PA’s for HazMat/Damon/Cameron/Melky with 4 guys for 3 spots every night.)

    • To be frank, signing all three wouldn’t be a bad idea either (although that kinda entails killing Brett Gardner’s career, since there would barely be enough PA’s for HazMat/Damon/Cameron/Melky with 4 guys for 3 spots every night.)

      This wouldn’t be a bad idea at all. You’d have Damon in left, keeping his bat in the lineup (it may decline, but it’d still be better than Melky’s bat there), put Cameron in CF (good CF bat, good defense, what’s not to like?), Swish stays in RF (do I still need to state his case?), and Melky’s the 4th OF/LIDR for the OF. We all seem to agree that Melky’s a 4th OF at best, so why not keep him there? It does hurt Gardner, but what’s his future? Melky with better defense, a little more on-base skill, and less power, right?

    • The Honorable Congressman Mondesi says:

      I’m on board with this. I’ve made no secret of my wariness of Cameron coming to the Yanks at this point in his career, but if they can sign only one of Damon/Matsui and can get Cameron on a 1 year deal to fill that second slot, I’m behind that strategy. It’s like Damon/Matsui light in that the offense takes a hit, but you still have a decent bat on a very short contract, with better defense. I’m just not enamored of the FA options and I don’t think Cashman is looking to lock himself into a long-term contract with any of the FAs. I love the idea of gaining flexibility by signing these older guys, it seems like a perfect fit for this team, at this moment with their current personnel and farm system, and this management team’s philosophy.

    • pollo says:

      Cameron, to me, seems like a no brainer. What he lacks in offense he more than makes up for in defense and he’s a nice 1 year stop gap. I’d rather see him than Damon.

  9. Frank says:

    I think Damon stays if he’s willing to accept a 1+1 year deal as the primary DH/backup OF. Move Melky to LF, sign Ankiel for CF (I like him more than Cameron or Byrd) and Swishwer in RF with Gardner as a backup. I also believe Posada also needs to see more time at DH and less as the primary catcher- his defense is just not cutting it. Whether it’s Cervelli or someone else, Posada needs to be phased out as the primary catcher. If Damon signs elsewhere, then bring back Matsui.

  10. kevin says:

    I think we should try to trade low on BJ Upton.

    What do you guys think it would take to get him?

  11. JobaWockeeZ says:

    That’s good. Going with Bay or Holliday would be bad moves considering the money the Yankees will have to pay for their decline.

    Cashamn aleady said he wasn’t going to be as agressive as last year but we’ll wait and see.

  12. Hey–just wanted to say thanks for all the comments in the last thread–yes, even the constructive ones =)

    A post has done its job when it provokes good discussion, so thanks!

    As for Damon and Matsui, sign both to one year deals and revisit the issue in 2010.

  13. theyankeewarrior says:

    My favorite part about Matsui and Damon or 1 yr deals is that Carl Crawford will be our LF in 2011 with AJax next to him in Center. That will be our “youth movement”. If Damon gets 2 years, or has his option picked up in 2011, he can be our full time DH and sit the bench if Alex, Derek, Tex, Jorge need a day off. Mo’s son Jesus will be DH’ing by then as well.


    • JobaWockeeZ says:

      Mo’s son Jesus will be DH’ing catching by then as well.
      He’s stays at catcher for years to come until it is a proven fact he can’t catch.

      • theyankeewarrior says:

        True, but I’m assuming Jorge will be catching most of the games while baby Jesus works his way into Pinstripes (and legally drinking beer)

      • pete says:

        i have to say, i disagree with this, and i think the yankees do too. People sometimes forget that a) DH is a legitimate position in the major leagues (my affectionate nickname for the AL), and b) that being an every day catcher damages both a player’s longevity and his offensive production. Personally, I think having a legitimately elite offensive player for the next 15 years is more productive than having a slightly lesser offensive player who is also a weak defender behind the plate whose production falls off a cliff in 10 years from knee damage.

        I’m not saying it’s a guarantee that montero gets injured or even isn’t a good defender, just that his bat is as close to a guarantee as one can get. Chances are, no matter what montero does he will be of extraordinary value to this team. But catcher is our deepest position in the minors and we also have the resources to acquire a catcher, if none of those guys work out. I get the sense with romine that he could turn into the next varitek (solid contact, solid power, solid d, little obp, strikes out a lot). With montero, i can’t help but feel that at C he’d be more like V-mart, whereas at DH his production could practically reach pujolsian levels.

        I know it’s an unpopular argument, and that it sounds a lot like the B-Jobber debate and seems like taking him off catcher lowers his value. But does it really? The DH’s spot in a lineup is every bit as valuable as the catcher’s, is it not? Considering the fact that we have a plethora of promising minor-league catchers, and no promising minor leaguers at 3B or SS, if you buy into the Jeter/A-Rod to DH theory, wouldn’t it be nice to have a regular DH who was a legitimate middle-of-the-order bat?

        That said, I don’t think we should take him off catcher immediately. If Montero has the ability to catch a decent game, then that gives the yanks the option of half-resting A-rod or jeter or posada (while he’s still around, anyway), without putting an auto-out in the lineup. You could still keep a third catcher (Frankie C – type) for defensive purposes, but you wouldn’t need to use him for anything else.

        I think what ends up happening with Montero (and not just out of necessity, but also because it will be the most beneficial to the team, long-term), is that he becomes our DH and primary backup catcher in the future. This will give the yankees the most flexibility as well as their strongest lineup, imo.

  14. Tubby says:

    Bring back Andy and Matsui for sure and sign Matt Holliday to a ridiculous contract. Holliday at his worst will still give you more production than Cameron, Crawford, Byrd, or Ankiel at their best.

    • Holliday at his worst will still give you more production than Cameron, Crawford, Byrd, or Ankiel at their best.

      That’s true, but not the point. Nobody disputes that Holliday will outproduce Cameron, Crawford, Byrd, or Ankiel in 2010.

      The problem is, we don’t want to be paying Holliday in 2014 when his production will no longer justify his contract. We want to have a clean slate by 2014 so we can go get someone better, or give the spot to an internal promotion.

      It’s a cost-benefit analysis. The smaller benefit of Damon or Cameron over Holliday is better than the massive cost of Holliday.

      • Doug says:

        “We want to have a clean slate by 2014 so we can go get someone better, or give the spot to an internal promotion.”

        make that 2011

        • Well, yeah, but I was just emphasizing the full nature of the Holliday contract. We’re tying up LF not just for 2010, but for 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2014. Possibly longer.

          • r.w.g. says:

            Well.. Holliday is what? 29? 30?

            A lot of elite hitters are still pounding the ball and driving in a lot of runs through their age 35 seasons. Matsui and Damon did it. Giambi did it. Alex is doing it. Jeter is doing it. Posada, too. We’ve got Tex signed up until he’s 38.

            I think if you can get Matt Holliday for 5 years, $100 MM, you do it. It’s not just whether he’ll outproduce Crawford in 2010, he’s going to outproduce Crawford for the rest of their careers. And I don’t see how getting Holliday would stop the team from still getting Crawford, anyway, if they wanted.

            Jeter, Rivera, Posada, Pettitte, Matsui/Damon (if back), would all have their contracts come off the books shortly after a Holliday contract were inked. He wouldn’t be blocking anybody because honestly, the team really only has 2 realistic position player prospects at this point.

      • Tubby says:

        I understand your point, but I don’t think there’s any indication that Holliday won’t be productive into his mid-30s. The Yanks are one of the few teams that can afford to lock up one of the best players in the game. We should take advantage of that, not shy away from it.

        • Doug says:

          but he’s not one of the best players in the game, right now, in his prime. and he certainly won’t be in 5 years’ time

          • Tubby says:

            He’s easily one of the top 5 outfielders in the game and it could be argued that he’d be the best OF in the AL in he joined the Yanks.

            • Doug says:

              you realize that his production was way down when he was playing in oakland, his 1st time in the AL. what makes you think he’d be the “best OF in the AL” playing in the AL East, having to hit guys like halladay, beckett, lester, garza multiple times a season?

              • Tubby says:

                He doesn’t have much of a sample size against those specific pitchers (5 for 15 lifetime), but his career numbers against AL playoff contenders are:

                BOS – .320/.358/.520
                TB – .323/.408/.548
                LAA – .275/.333/.550
                DET – .487/.574/.590
                MIN – .313/.405/.625

                And his OPS in Oakland was still better than Crawford’s career high and was better than 13 of Cameron’s 15 seasons.

              • r.w.g. says:

                His production was awful.. all the way down to a 120 OPS+.

                The scouting is pretty clear that he did something regarding a toe-tap when he was traded to Oakland, either eliminating it or adding it [don't remember which] after working with Mark McGwire. He ditched it a few months into his time in Oakland. His numbers were already getting nutty before the Athletics shipped him out.

                You want to worry about something, worry about his career .454 SLG on the road. However, considering his BB/K numbers and doubles numbers, coupled with playing his entire career in a /humidor’d Coors Field, I find it VERY hard to believe that the disparity in his Home/Away HR totals (100/52) isn’t enormously effected by a right handed hitter playing 57 of his 81 road games a year in San Francisco, San Diego, and Los Angeles.

                Or considering that the home/away split pattern stayed practically identical in 2009 should tell us the guy just gets jacked up playing at home. Or maybe Oakland and St. Louis have pitcher-ish parks.

                Or maybe Matt Holliday sucks. You never know.

                • r.w.g. says:

                  that 57 of 81 statistic is wrong. ignore that, throw it out, criticize me if you want.

                  i just added up the amount of total games played against divisional opponents and had a brainfart in not understanding that half of those games are at Coors.

    • JobaWockeeZ says:

      Yeah and when the Yankees are paying for his decline years his production will equal a Cameron today. Difference is one is cheap and one is expensive. Pass.

      • The Honorable Congressman Mondesi says:

        I’m with you guys on this, I don’t want any part of Matt Holliday in pinstripes in 2010, but this reasoning is way oversimplified. You could have said the same thing about the Tex signing last offseason, Tex’s production at the very end of his contract won’t match the money he’s being paid. The difference is context. Context, context, context.

  15. pollo says:

    Any situation which has a player with a -38ish uzr/150 see the field is never desirable to me. Damon’s done as an outfielder..please don’t re-sign him to play the field.

  16. currambayankees says:

    I think it would be great for the Yankees to bring all three players back on one year deals but not more then that. I hope the Yankees learned their lesson with Bernie that sometimes it is better to let them go one year too early then one year too late. I

  17. CharlieD says:

    the Yanks will get instantly younger when they don’t resign Molina and let Cervelli do the backup catching next year.

  18. Joseph D says:

    If the Yankees don’t sign Damon or Cameron is there any realistic trade possibilities out there for a corner outfielder?

  19. 5th Starter says:

    I think that the Yanks should offer Damon arbitration. Its a one year deal and if he walks the Yanks get a draft pick.
    $15 million for one year > $20-25 for two year, IMO

    • Doug says:

      “$15 million for one year > $20-25 for two year, IMO”

      i agree

      offer him arbitration and if he accepts, see if you can work out something in the $10-12M range. maybe add a team option in 2011 for the same ($1M buyout)

  20. cor shep says:

    How about Damon for DH and Cameron for CF shifting Swish to LF and Melk to RF? I like this

    • I’m fine with that.

      The more I think about it, though, the more I like the idea of signing all three (Damon/Matsui/Cameron). Even if we brought back Damon and HazMat at the identical 13M salaries they made last year, we’d still have like 17M in expiring money from Wang/Nady/Molina/Hinske/Bruney. We could give Cameron like a 1/8 or so and still have money left over for arb raises.

      2010 13-man position player corps:
      C-Ol’ Man Urine Hands
      1B-The Best Tex I Ever Had
      2B-The Lazy Dominican
      3B-Nails Krzyzewski
      SS-The Blazing Copper Horse
      LF-Johnny Rightfieldporch
      CF-Mike Cameron
      RF-The Most Interesting Man in the World

      Backup C-Cervelli
      UTI-Jerry Hairston
      4th OF-Leche Suckmynuts
      13th man-Gritt Guttner

      J-Hair can give ARod and Jeter the occasional day off; Swish backs up Tex, and Melky (and to a lesser extent Gardner) see a good amount of OF time while Damon is resting/DHing, Cameron is resting/playing LF, or Swisher is resting/playing 1B.

      Or, if you want to start Melky in CF, then Cameron is like an upgraded version of 2008 Xavier Nady or 2009 Eric Hinske: A quality, veteran bat who gives you solid production off the bench, but he actually can play LF/RF well and can play CF, giving more flexibility.

      Mike Cameron is a good fit for the 2010 Yankees.

      • cor shep says:

        Oh believe me I love this. I just don’t see the Yankees signing Damon Hazmat and Cameron. I think it’ll be 2 of the 3, and maybe (hopefully not) 1 of the 3.

        My order goes Damon then Cameron then Hatsui.

        Well I’m real fucking confident in this team no matter what so whatever they do I’ll be happy with. In Cash we trust.

  21. Mister Delaware says:

    A guy like Dejesus could be a nice fit. Very good defender in LF with the ability to play CF as well and he’s in line for $4.7MM next season. KC might see that as an opportunity to reallocate money and bring in a decent prospect or two.

    Wonder if there are any other buy low candidates out there beyond Hermida. Chris Young would give stellar CF defense with plenty of offensive upside. Arizona could be somewhat tempted to get out from under his contract ($25MM+ guaranteed over the next 4 years) and they have Parra ready to play but I imagine there would still be a decent price tag attached.

    I wouldn’t be against adding both a CF and a LF (non-Holliday/Bay category) and putting Melky into the 4th OF role that he’s best suited for. He was fine this season as the lineup above him was one of the best of the decade but with an injury or two, you might start to feel the downside of a .336 OBP / .142 isoP hitter who puts up decent but not special defense in CF.

  22. danny says:

    i would rather have damon and matsui on 1 year deals, and maybe with an option for damon, then to have Bay or Holiday on multi year deals

    with the money and years that they are going to ask for, its just not worth it

    • Doug says:

      agreed, except with me it’s more the years than the $. if somehow, holliday would agree to a 3/75 contract, i’d be all over that. it’s him wanting 5 years that has me saying no thanks.

  23. Mister Delaware says:

    I think you’re underrating DeJesus’s defense and ability to play CF here and a quick look at his spray charts say he could probably pop 20 given a move to NY. I’ll take that over Damon assuming the prospect cost wouldn’t be anything crazy.

    (And how does someone with “ridiculous upside” in their name not like Chris Young? C’mon! Every year a new Swisher trade.)

    • Mister Delaware says:

      Balls, missed the reply button. This one was for you, TSJC.

    • A) Please use the reply button. It keeps the convo more organized.
      B) You’re severely overrating DeJesus’s ability to play CF. He’s not that good. He’s like Rick Ankiel: they’re both corner OF’s playing in center because there was no other option at the time. But DeJesus’s poor CF play was the driving force behind the Royals trading for Coco Crisp.
      C) DeJesus’s WAR the past 4 years: 3.8, 2.7, 2.7, 3.2. Mike Cameron: 4.4, 2.2, 4.0, 4.3. Mike Cameron is a better baseball player than David DeJesus is. And, Cameron costs nothing but money.

      Cameron >>>>>>>>>>> DeJesus

      • Brooklyn Ed - slacking in class now says:

        your take on Ryan Church? he could be nontender.

      • Mister Delaware says:

        A) Agreed, hence my note below the comment. This ain’t my first RAB rodeo.

        B) I don’t think I am. He’s not a 150 game CF but he can play CF if need be. He’d do more for us out there than Gardner would if its a DL injury to the starter and Jackson isn’t deemed ready. Besides, statistically (the various ZRs) he’s not all that different than the guy we have out there now.

        C) I don’t see where Cameron vs DeJesus comes into play since their acquisitions wouldn’t need to be mutually exclusive (from either a cost or a roster space standpoint). Its not like Melky needs to either start in CF or LF; we’re most likely a better team if he doesn’t. Cameron & DeJesus would be a net upgrade on offensive and a massive upgrade on defense over Cabrera & Damon.

  24. DJ says:

    I say just sign Nick Johnson to be the DH. His OBP will defintely do wonders for the line-up in the 2 spot, and his HR power should go up in Yankee Stadium. He should be cheap to.

  25. larryf says:

    Damon proves you don’t need an arm in center (2004) or left (2009) to win. Whew! At least we can all agree on that….

    • The Honorable Congressman Mondesi says:

      Glad we put that controversial discussion topic to bed, I was getting tired of hearing about it all the time.

  26. pete says:

    guys to sign:
    1. Pettitte
    2. Matsui
    3. Cameron
    4. Damon
    5. Wang, if you can get him on a minor league deal (might happen)
    6. J-Douche, if he’s willing to come sit in the NY bullpen (probably won’t happen)
    7. Nady, if minor league deal (not gonna happen)

    guys not to sign:
    1. Lackey
    2. Holliday
    3. Bay

    The reason i want damon, hazmat, and cameron, despite they’re combined age of over 350, is specifically BECAUSE they’re old. damon and matsui have both shown that rest can be extremely beneficial to an aging player, and i think resting damon a good amount would improve his defense and offense, and getting cameron some regular rest would keep him fresh, thus allowing his defense to remain elite all season. This, my friends, is the true value of melky cabrera. As a starting CF, he’s not ideal, but as somebody whose 4 starts per week keep our three OF/DH vets performing like they’re 33/34, not 37/38, he is immensely valuable. With someone like joe torre, who likes to set a lineup in april and call it a season, i’d be a little more worried, but for all the knocks on girardi, founded or unfounded (mostly un), he has proven that he has an exceptional ability to get all his players the right amount of playing time and rest to keep them performing.

  27. Mike bk says:

    Andy comes back if for no other reason to stop this Lackey crap, please. As far as the offensive side goes signing Cameron and trading for Brad Hawpe would give us more flexibility similar production and better defense for the same money and time commitment Damon and Matsui will require.

  28. Jeff Nelson says:

    I agree sign all three to one-year deals. Think of this as the Yanks’ two year window, use the veterans while they still have some left in the tank. Re-evaluate after 2010, maybe AJax and Romine/Montero will be ready?

  29. [...] today we heard that the Yankees are looking for a way to keep both Johnny Damon and Hideki Matsui around in 2010, a fine strategy as long as they both [...]

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.