Trade market heating up with Jimenez, Danks, Nolasco talk


With just five days until the non-waiver trade deadline, rumors are starting to fly with reckless abandon. The Yankees, by all indications, are looking into most available starting pitchers. There are ups and downs to each, of course, so let’s take a look at the three that have gotten some play in the past day.

Ubaldo Jimenez: In terms of talent, years of control, and contract, he’s the best pitcher on the market. It’s still unclear why the Rockies would consider trading him in the first place. The only reason is to start a quick rebuilding process, since their two biggest stars are under contract for many years to come. Joel Sherman reports that the Rockies have come down in price and are asking for three of Manny Banuelos, Dellin Betances, Jesus Montero, and Ivan Nova. Perhaps if they take two and some other prospects it could work, but I cant’ see the Yanks trading three of their top five guys for him.

Ricky Nolasco: We’ve heard his name mentioned a few times in passing before, but nothing seriously. This morning SI’s Jon Heyman said that the Yanks tried for him, but that the Marlins aren’t ready to deal. Nolaso is under contract through 2013, for $9 million next year and $11.5 million in 2013. I don’t quite like this one, unless he comes super cheap. His results have never matched his potential — they’ve been pretty far off, in fact — and his strikeouts are way down this year.

John Danks: There’s nothing connecting him to the Yankees, but Ken Rosenthal reports that he’s on the market. I wrote up the case for Danks last week. He’s my favorite option on the market, all considered. He won’t cost as much as Jimenez and he’s better than Nolasco. The White Sox seem to be in wheeling and dealing mode right now; as I write this, they’re in the process of trading Edwin Jackson to the Blue Jays.

Categories : Trade Deadline


  1. Johnny O says:

    Just saw the E-Jax to the Jays thing on MLBTR. Can anyone explain that move to me? Wouldn’t getting more long-term help in return for Frasor make more sense?

    • Looks like they’re going to re-flip him. Probably to the Cardinals. Probably for Rasmus. I hate the Cardinals.

      • 28 this year says:

        I hate the White Sox for not just taking Rasmus. The White Sox don’t scare me but the Jays are getting to the point of being the type of thorn that the Rays are. The Jays still have work to do but they are getting there with each move. Stupid Angels giving them hope.

      • Crime Dog says:

        So the Jays are presumably getting Rasmus for two relievers (Frasor and Rauch?) and a prospect?

      • If they did that, the Cards would have Garcia-Lohse-Westbrook under contract with Wainwright probably coming back for Opening Day. They ‘d have a 15M option on Carpenter, but they could instead let him walk and give 10M-ish to Edwin Jackson instead and have a solid rotation.

        Is Wainwright-Jackson-Garcia-Lohse-Westbrook enticing enough for Pujols?

        • Rick in Boston says:

          Maybe, it is the NL Central, after all. Plus, there are a couple of young pitchers moving aggressively in that system.

    • 28 this year says:

      Also, what kind of deal is Frasor and a prospect. Better be one hell of a prospect because I would like to think the Yankees could compose a package that could top that deal and get Jackson. Maybe I am underrating Frasor but that doesn’t seem like a steep price for a rental, seems pretty cheap.

    • vin says:

      MLBTR said it looks like Jackson, Teahan for Frasor and a prospect. Better be one damn solid prospect.

    • Tampa Yankee says:

      From MLBTR:

      10:09am: Joel Sherman of the New York Post tweets that this deal is close but not complete, because the money exchange requires approval and the Jays are trying to spin Jackson to another team. That team may be the Cardinals, based on tweets from Joe Strauss, Jon Heyman, and Sherman. Sherman believes the Cardinals could also get a reliever and Colby Rasmus may be involved, but nothing is official.

      If the Jays cans flip EJax for Rasmus that’s good for them. They’d essentially flip Frasor and a prospect for Teahen and Rasmus.

    • Sure, but what level of under-longterm-contract starting pitcher are you really going to get for Jason Frasor? Probably not much.

      Even for only two months of Jackson (plus an exclusive negotiating window and draft pick compensation), it seems like a solid sell-high of Jason Frasor, who’s a good-but-not-otherworldly middle reliever who is neither cheap nor young.

      All depends on the prospect; if Kenny Williams got Frasor plus a good prospect from the Jays for Jackson/Teahen, it makes sense for CWS (and less sense for TOR). If the prospect is crappy, it looks like Kenny undersold Jackson.

      This trade seems like one side lost pretty easily, either by undervaluing a good starter or overvaluing a decent reliever; we’ll find out when that prospect is revealed.

      • The Fallen Phoenix says:

        I’m not sure who but the White Sox could lose if Jackson is either undervalued or Frasor is overvalued. Unless you’re pretty sure the White Sox lose and it’s just a question of how much they’ve lost by (which, if the Jays end up flipping Jackson for Rasmus, is probably true no matter how good a prospect the White Sox get back).

  2. theyankeewarrior says:

    Looking at the proposed package for Jackson-to-the-Jays, what would the Yankees have to do to beat it?

  3. Mike D. says:

    John Danks is now on the trade market, so no worries gentlemen about E-Jax. Danks is superior.

    • X-62 says:

      Yeah, I could totally see the Yankees landing danks this deadline. Quentin is available too as is Thornton and Floyd. Big time dealing in Chicago coming up this deadline.

    • StanfordBen says:

      How is Danks superior? A brief look at their stats makes me think E-Jax is definitely better. Were you referring to what it would cost and contract and things like that, or did I just not look closely enough at the stats?

      • Rick in Boston says:

        Lefty pitcher and still under team control. But I’m not sure if the Sox are moving Jackson that they’ll want to move Danks. The team is still in contention in that division.

      • vin says:

        Gavin is LH and is under contract for 2 more years (including his club option) at a very reasonable price. Edwin is a FA after this year.

      • Sayid J. says:

        Yea… Unsure of what stats you are looking at.

        • StanfordBen says:

          E-Jax 3.21 FIP, 3.42 xFIP this year, 3.86 and 3.71 last year.
          Danks 4.01 FIP, 3.91 xFIP this year, 3.70 and 3.99 last year.
          And E-Jax has a higher K/9 the last couple of years.

          But the contract thing that others mentioned makes sense.

  4. Operation Slade says:

    What prospect does Toronto have thats any good besides Lawrie?

  5. Kiersten says:

    I don’t understand how in one sentence it’s “why are the Rockies considering trading him? He’s good, cheap and under team control.” And then the next is, the Yankees won’t trade three of their top five prospects for him.

    Ubaldo is a legit number 2 and he is not a rental. What are you gonna get that’s better for a package like that? It’s not like the Yankees have all of their pitching problems solved for next year, they will have more. Like I said last night, this would give the Yankees a formidable 1-2 for the next 2 1/2 seasons. For the price of an awesome bat with no position, a big question mark, and a number five starter. If the Rockies really would take Montero, Betances, Nova and one or two fringe prospects, I don’t know how you say no.

    • X-62 says:

      I agree. I would seriously consider Montero, Betances and Nova for Jimenez.

      • Cris Pengiuci says:

        Definitely agree with this. However, if you could have Wandy as a salary dump, is he a better option or is the possibility of him failing in the AL East too high? I’d also like to see what it takes to get Danks. Still a few good options out there.

        • X-62 says:

          I think Wandy going to the ALE with a big money deal might be to risky. I would however definetly see what it takes to get Danks.

      • bottom line says:

        No way I trade these three. Montero will prove to be Yanks best internally developed power prosepct since Mantle. He’s a huge haul for Rockies, especially in that park. I give either Zeus or Betances, plus Nova. Maybe add Marshall of Cojo or even Heathcott if necessary. No way I trade two of top three for pitcher who suddenly and mysteriously available. Cash’s record trading for pitchers is awful.

      • Adam B says:

        I think you have to consider that.

    • David, Jr. says:

      Agree. To me that would be like the Granderson trade, in that players of real value would be given up (of course), in exchange for an ideal fit. Win-Win.

      The decision could come down to the difference between a Ubaldo trade and say a Danks trade. If we could get Danks for perhaps Romine, Nova and Noesi, perhaps that would be preferable to Ubaldo for two of the big prospects. Danks is a lefty, which the Yankees may prefer.

    • The Fallen Phoenix says:

      You’re giving up a combined 12 years of potentially-elite cost controlled production for two years of cost-controlled starting pitching if you traded the Rockies 2 of Montero/Banuelos/Betances. That’s not exactly small bones, even for a team like the Yankees that can weather repeated large hits to its payroll (i.e., purchasing a starter and a bat down the line).

      I’ll grant that Ubaldo likely has a bigger impact than Montero, Banuelos, and Betances over the next two years. In fact, I’d almost guarantee it. It’s also worth noting that Montero, Banuelos, and Betances aren’t necessarily at the peak of their value, either – if Cashman wanted to deal them for a starter, he could probably afford to see if any starters are available this offseason.

      Just because Jimenez is available doesn’t mean Cashman has to jump on him. In fact, Jimenez’s price is inflated precisely because he represents the only supply of top-of-the-rotation starting pitching right now. Right now, no, Cashman can’t do better than Jimenez with the package proposed. Cashman might be able to do better than Jimenez this offseason, and he might be able to do better still by making no deal at all, and keeping the potentially-elite, cost-controlled talent for himself.

      • Kiersten says:

        Potentially is your key word there. Ubaldo already is the real deal.

        I mean, do you really feel comfortable going into the playoffs with the current rotation? This is the Yankees. You want to wait around for prospects and not worry about this season, go root for the Rays.

        (Of course that’s not to say you just give away prospects, but the Yankees currently have a top system and they need to capitalize on it.)

        • The Fallen Phoenix says:

          Yeah, actually, I do feel comfortable going into the playoffs with the current rotation. Just like I felt comfortable going into the playoffs with the 2009 rotation, which truthfully wasn’t remarkably better than this one. Or just like the Rangers felt comfortable going into the playoffs with last year’s rotation, and that worked out pretty well for them across two rounds, too (and the Rangers last year didn’t have the offense we have this year).

          • Kiersten says:

            Well then we disagree on that.

            But you also have to look at next year as well. Colon and Garcia will be gone and the FA market is bleak.

            • The Fallen Phoenix says:

              And pitchers who aren’t on the trading block now will be available in the off-season. And there’s no law that states the Yankees cannot resign one (or both) of Colon or Garcia, if they believe they could get reasonable production from one (or both) of them at a decent price.

      • Cris Pengiuci says:

        Yeah, but it’s all a guessing game. Where will Montero fit in with the team? Will Betances really pan out or will he bust? Nova is the most prohjectable of the bunch. He seems a solid 4/5 SP, perhaps a 3 if he can figure out how to miss bats. Jimenez is a proven MLB starter. If he just continues doing what he’s done (career averages, not this year) for the remainder of the contract, I think you make the trade. Of course, he could get injured and provide nothing, so still a risk.

        • The Fallen Phoenix says:

          Having the highest demonstrated floor (especially when that floor is a #5/#6 starter) does not equate to being the most projectable. Most pitchers don’t suddenly “figure out” how to miss bats, although I’ll acknowledge that with Nova it’s at least in the realm of possibility.

          Betances has far more projection than Nova, the question with him is whether he’ll stay healthy and be able to control his pitches against major-league hitters. And I’d argue control is probably easier to improve as you get older (see: Lee, Cliff; Hallady, Roy; Colon, Bartolo) than the spontaneous ability to just miss bats.

      • X-62 says:

        I guess it just comes down to does NY believe Ubaldo is a difference maker as far as winning a WS in the next 3 seasons, ecause as I said before if you do this deal your almost assured to lose long term, no way Montero,Betances and Nova don’t out WAR Ubaldo and give more value over the next 6 years.

        When Cashman later talked about trading Montero for 3 monthss of Lee he said it was worth it because he felt Lee was the difference between a WS title and not, so I guess it all depends if he feels Ubaldo is the difference between a WS title or not over the life of his contract.

  6. X-62 says:

    If the Jays get Rasmus that would kind of suck from an ALE rival point of view. The Jays are slowly turning into a TB type of team, I could see them having a shot at the postseason next year with 2 WC’s.

  7. Hester Prynne says:

    A deal must be made for a #2 starter. Cashman knows this, knows he didn’t get the job done last year and that cost us a trip to the WS.

    • Ted Nelson says:

      Or… overpaying for a SP might not be the right move. What the team needs is 1/2 of the equation. What the team needs to give up to get that is the other 1/2.

    • Jim S says:

      And we all know how the downfall of that deal was Cashman’s fault.

    • Rick in Boston says:

      Still not sure how Cashman failed last year. Both the D-Backs (Skaggs) and Mariners (Smoak) got the prospect(s) they wanted.

      • Kiersten says:

        He failed at getting a starter. Was it his fault? No. But he still had a goal of trading for a starter and didn’t do it.

        • Rick in Boston says:

          Was there another upgrade available last year during the deadline? I honestly cannot remember.

        • Ted Nelson says:

          The other side to failing to get a starter could very well be failing to make a bad trade where you give up too much in prospect costs/succeeding in running an organization well…

          • Ted Nelson says:

            Plus at the time of the deadline a starter did not look like a pressing need with a young stud prospect looking like he was coming into his own and a proven veteran who had competed for the Cy Young the season the previous season looking like he’d gotten over his early season struggles. I believe Burnett was also much worse in the 2nd half than 1st…

            I think saying that Cashman failed is both a revisionist history and ignoring what running an organization is about.

          • Kiersten says:

            I agree. I’m not saying Cashman did anything wrong. But it’s a fact that he failed to trade for a starting pitcher.

            • But it’s a fact that he failed to trade for a starting pitcher.

              That’s true. What’s not a fact is that he needed to trade for a starting pitcher; that’s just an opinion.

              So he might have failed at something that was non-essential and was simply a missed opportunity.

            • Ted Nelson says:

              I just don’t think that sentence has much meaning. If you failed to do something you didn’t want to do (make a trade you felt was an overpay)… you ultimately succeeded.

              • Kiersten says:

                I think we’re just looking at this in two different ways.

                • Ted Nelson says:

                  I agree. I’m not saying that he succeeded in getting a SP last season. I’m just saying that it might not have much meaning. It might be a bit like either saying A. CC didn’t pitch a complete game shutout last night (the outcome was very good, but not perfect) or B. CC didn’t have 7 IP and 2 ERs last night (the outcome was actually better than what we hoped). Giving up Montero, Banuelos, possibly both… that’s a steep price to pay. The Yankees could end up regretting trading those guys as easily as they could end up regretting not trading them for a front-line starter (especially an expensive one in his 30s).

                  • Ted Nelson says:

                    And I’m also saying that it’s a bit revisionist to consider how the rotation fell apart down the stretch and not how it looked at the time of the deadline.

        • The Fallen Phoenix says:

          Saying Cashman failed to acquire Cliff Lee probably undersells the role of the Seattle GM in agreeing to a trade. By all reports, Smoak was the bat the Mariners wanted, and the only way to top that is an overpay.

          You have to account for the means as well as the goals when evaluating the success or failure of a General Manager in these situations. The Angels needed a bat this past offseason; they acquired Vernon Wells. Was their offseason a success because they acquired Vernon Wells, who represented a bat they wanted/needed? Of course not, because the price (Wells’ absurd contract) was too high.

  8. Ted Nelson says:

    “It’s still unclear why the Rockies would consider trading him in the first place.”

    To get 2/3 top 25-40 prospects from the Yankees and/or a 24 year old SP who is proving he can pitch in MLB, all of whom are MLB ready or close…

    Imagine Montero alone in Coors. His power would really play-up in the best hitter’s park in all of baseball. If they can get him plus 2 good young starting Ps to replace one Jimenez… that’s almost a no-brainer.

    • X-62 says:

      Exactly, I don’t get this “why would they trade him? Something must be wrong!” attitude. On opening day 2012 if COL has Montero and Nova with Betances getting ready in Triple A they might be better then if they just have Jimenez. Going for Ubaldo your losing the “value” game, so you only do the deal if you believe Ubaldo is a true difference maker as far as winning a WS goes.

      That’s why COL would be willing to move him and thats why a team would consider doing it. A team that believes it has a chance at a WS in 2011-2013 might be willing to lose the “value” game for a title but starting next year and going forward COL would most likely be a better team then it is now for making the deal.

  9. OldYanksFan says:

    Unfortunately we have to keep in mind that almost every team in MLB has an aversion to helping the Yankees. Between this and the reamins of George’s style of GET HIM NO MATTER WHAT!, Cashman is always at a disadvantage on the trade market.

    Most teams will try and rape the Yankees (Baldy for our TOP 4 PROSPECTS), but few will consider a fair trade.

    Salary dumps… yes.
    Malcontents… yes.

    A fair deal that will help up to the WS?

    • Ted Nelson says:

      I don’t think this is true.

      No team wants to help out any other team. They make deals based on how they benefit their own teams, not the other team. Intra-division trades being somewhat of an exception.

      We Yankees fans tend to overvalue Yankees prospects and undervalue other teams prospects. People see Skaggs get traded for Haren without realizing that Skaggs + Saunders + two other arms was/is roughly equal to Banuelos + Joba + two other arms. They see Escobar, Odorizzi, Jeffress, and Cain going to KC for Greinke without realizing that this was roughly equal to Montero, Betances, Joba/Robertson, and an MLB-ready role player.

      The Rockies have zero pressure that we know of to trade a young, cheap ace like Ubaldo… they’re offering him to the Yankees only so that they can get a great return… seems pretty evident that they’d ask for a great return. There’s no indication that they’re actively trying to get rid of Ubaldo, just that they’re willing to move him for a great return they think helps their team more than a cheap young ace (not that I know the inner-workings of the Rockies… by indication I mean public info).

      • Reggie C. says:

        If the price has come down and Cashman can stave off the loss of Banuelos and acquire Ubaldo, the trade ought to be done.

        Cashman has offered Montero in the past, and though ubaldo is no cliff lee, ubaldo is not a rental.

        Maybe this turns out to be our version of hanley-beckett. Didn’t anibal sanchez also go in that deal?

        • Ted Nelson says:

          “If the price has come down and Cashman can stave off the loss of Banuelos and acquire Ubaldo, the trade ought to be done.”

          That’s your opinion, and you’re entitled to it. Some people would tell you Betances is better than Banuelos.

          To me Montero, Betances, and Nova for Ubaldo is a tough call. I might do it, but it wouldn’t be easy to decide. I can see an argument either way.

    • Mike HC says:

      I’m with you. There is an inherent extra Yankee Tax with almost every deal, trade, free agent or otherwise.

  10. coolerking101 says:

    I don’t see Danks and Nolasco being a huge benefit. The Yankees need a true #2 pitcher to have a rotation that can match up against the Sox/Phills/Giants. IMO, neither Danks nor Nolasco is a #2.

    Ubaldo, on the other hand, may put this team over the top. Whether seriously increasing the team’s chances at a title is worth sacrificing two potential studs and a young back end starter (Montero/Betances/Nova) is certainly up for discussion.

  11. theyankeewarrior says:

    Does anyone have a link to the Danks rumors?

    I haven’t seen anything concrete a all…

  12. infernoscurse says:

    id go after danks, kenny williams is a moron he trades gio for swisher then turns swisher for betemit , he trades daniel hudson for ejax and then trades him for frasor

    so in terms of equation

    Kenny williams (M) + johndanks¹º = Brian Cashman + $ (andrew brackman)¼
    john danks¹ = andrew brackman + Luis Ayala + jorge Vazquez

    yankees = Danks WS27

    • Mike HC says:

      Danks is going to cost a big time prospect. Probably Montero or Banuelos, possibly Betances.

    • I’d say it’s likely this EJax for Frasor deal means the White Sox are going for it this deadline and are buyers, meaning Danks/Floyd/Peavy/Buerhle probably aren’t available.

      • infernoscurse says:

        but its already reported that floyd and danks are also available

        • Ted Nelson says:

          Not all rumors are true… and even if they are “available” they might be available in the sense that Ubaldo is: available if you want to overpay. Available if you’ll give up a Lee/Sizemore/Phillips for Colon type package.

        • With Kenny Williams, everybody is always available. What that availability effectively means, though, varies.

          IMO, based on the type of trades Williams makes when his team is just a few games out of the lead near the deadline (including this EJax for Frasor swap happening now), Floyd and Danks are probably available ONLY if that deal includes major-league pieces that can allow the White Sox to continue competing for the AL Central title this year.

          I.E., Floyd and Danks are probably available but not simply for an all-prospects deal, which is the kind we’d be interested in. If Kenny Williams puts Floyd or Danks on the market, he’s going to want something like Brett Gardner or David Robertson as part of a Yankee package, something that offsets the cost of losing Danks for this 2011 season.

  13. vin says:

    Maybe the Cards are actually trading Colby’s dad to the Blue Jays? That would probably solve their biggest problem (in their eyes at least).

  14. Mike HC says:

    Danks is the guy to get. But I’m sure a lot of teams feel that way. Could be lots of competition.

    • Rick in Boston says:

      I’m not sure if Danks is really available. Jackson is being swapped for a reliever that will upgrade one of Chicago’s big problems. The White Sox can still win that division, and I’m not sure they’d want to throw up a white flag (no pun intended) yet.

      • Mike D. says:

        Yeah, but I have no doubt Cashman will give every effort to pry him away. And I believe Cashman and Williams have a good business relationship.

  15. Hester Prynne says:

    We do need a #2 for Boston and the NL winner. Boston has the best lineup and their 1-2 is currently better than ours. The Giants and Phillies go 3 deep in their rotations and we can’t match up with that. You get Ubaldo you’ve got a young kid, not a 35 year old, and a solid #2 for the playoffs. CC-Ubaldo-Bartolo-Freddy. Best part- No Hughes, no AJ.

    • Mike D. says:

      I’d rather get Danks for Montero and 2 other decent prospects, than Jimenez for Montero & Baneulos & more prospects.

    • “We do need WANT a #2 for Boston and the NL winner.”

      Needs and wants are not identical. We want another starter to add meaningful depth and hedge bets and provide more potential opportunities so we aren’t forced to rely on unreliable people. We similarly wanted Cliff Lee last year for all those reasons.

      We didn’t NEED Cliff Lee last year, however, and we don’t NEED another starter now. It’s just a want, because we want to improve our chances of winning. But we already have very, very good chances of winning without adding anyone.

  16. Kevin G. says:

    I love how both the trade deadline and NFL free agency heat up at the same time.

  17. bonestock94 says:

    Wow, the trade market just got interesting.

    White send EJax and Teahen to the Blue Jays for prospects.

    Blue Jays send EJax, a reliever, and prospects for Rasmus!

  18. Cy Pettitte says:

    Heyman says ejax to the Jays is done deal, fuck.

  19. Jedile says:

    Ubaldo for JoVa, Betances, Nova, and Romine!

    JoVa should mash in colorado, right?? They are looking for a first baseball to take helton’s place later on?

  20. first time lawng time says:

    Please don’t trade Nova, Montero, or Banuelos.

  21. bonestock94 says:

    Dear Felix Hernandez to the Yankees trade speculators,




  22. Kiersten says:

    Don’t think anyone’s mentioned this, but according to Heyman, the Yankees tried for Nolasco and the Marlins said they’re not ready to trade him.

  23. Rich in NJ says:

    I would trade Nova and Betances before Montero, who I would only trade for an offensive impact player in his 20s, who isn’t a DH/1B.

    • Kiersten says:

      Pitching >>>>>>>>>>> hitting. Especially for the Yankees.

      • Steve O. says:

        Sure, but at the same time, when a lower probability pitching prospect can be traded for proven pitching, you do it.

      • Rich in NJ says:

        They are deep in near ML ready pitching prospects. Montero is their only ML ready impact bat, and the current catcher hasn’t hit since April.

        A-Rod is 36 and may never regain the power he once had. Jeter is 37. Posada is on his way out. Tex may never again be the hitter he was in 2009.

        So they need Montero more than pitching.

        • Ted Nelson says:

          Their offense is still #2 in MLB… I think you’re overselling their need for hitting.

          At the same time… Mitchell is considered a #5 candidate at best, Phelps maybe a #4 or #5, Warren maybe a #3-5, Noesi maybe a #3 or #4, Brackman is really struggling, Stoneburner is having a bad year… so I think you’re overselling their pitching prospects a bit. They’re deep, but the quality is more good than great.

          Also… Montero is not their only hitting prospect. Some see Romine rather than Montero as their next C. Behind him you’ve got Murphy, Sanchez, and now Tejada. You’ve got Laird, CoJo, and Adams in the IF. You’ve got a bumper crop of position prospects in the low minors who could be ready around the time when the current core are starting to fade.

          I would say it’s all about trade value in terms of whether they trade Montero or whoever else. They don’t “need” any of them. Montero is their best prospect, though, so they need the best return to trade him relative to his peers.

          • Rich in NJ says:

            No, I’m looking at a longer time horizon than this season. I am also suggesting that Montero has the potential to help transform this from a very good offensive, to a dominant one. Splitting time at C with Martin could benefit both of them, and Montero could DH on the days that he doesn’t catch.

            I said ML ready impact bat. The names you mentioned are either not projected to be that, or are not close to the ML.

            • Ted Nelson says:

              See below… I am looking at a longer time horizon than this season too… Granderson, Teixeira, Cano, Gardner, Martin, Swisher are not signed past what should be prime seasons or close to it. If they leave, the Yankees can sign or trade for someone else. A-Rod is 35… but that doesn’t mean he’ll fall off a cliff. Jeter stinks… but it is what it is and Nunez stinks about the same as Jeter but should be trending in the opposite direction.

              Romine is close to MLB ready and is projected to be a fine C offensively. CoJo is close to MLB ready and if he stays at 2B projects to be a good hitter, as does Adams (who is rehabbing and that’s why he’s in A-ball). Laird could be a decent platoon or bench bat. All those guys should be in MLB later next season or 2013 if they will ever be. The Yankees are not desperate for offense next season or 2013 under any reasonable set of expectations. Looking past 2013, you start to have prospects like Slade, Murphy, Sanchez, Flores, Williams, Gumbs, Culver, Bichette… having a chance of being MLB ready… which is why I don’t see the point of projecting 5 years ahead and saying that none of the numerous strong position prospects they have in the low minors will be an impact MLB bat or traded for one.

              Bats are as easy to come by at DH and in RF as any position besides maybe 1B… and those are their only two big holes going forward. C and SS are holes on just about every team.

              My point is that with so many huge offensive weapons in their primes… the Yankees do not need an impact bat any time soon. I am a huge Montero fan and hope he’s a HOF hitter for the Yankees. I think he’s got tremendous value as a prospect. That doesn’t mean I think they can’t trade him if the right deal comes along.

          • David, Jr. says:

            He is referring to future hitting needs, not this year, and it isn’t a bad point. Fast forward to a 2013 lineup.

            • Ted Nelson says:

              I am also talking about future hitting needs.


              Gardner = 29
              Granderson = 32
              Teixeira = 33
              A-Rod = 37
              Cano = 30
              Swisher = 32/get a new RF
              DH = fairly easy to acquire
              Martin = 30/Romine = 24
              Jeter = 39/Nunez = 26

              That’s still a top offensive team in all likelihood.

              Corban Joseph, David Adams, and Laird should have graduated and at least gotten a shot in MLB somewhere (if traded Yankees could have gotten a bat for them).
              Slade and Murphy could be in AAA.
              Flores and Sanchez could be in AA or even AAA.
              Culver, Gumbs, Mason, Bichette, Austin, Santana, Calderon, Custodio, etc. could be in High A or AA… with trade value and/or getting close to MLB ready-ish.

              The Yankees could have traded any of their MiLB depth for a hitter if a big need arises (RF or DH for example). They could sign someone with Jorge and/or Swisher’s money that expires.

              Anything can happen, but projecting the Yankees line-up to fall apart anytime soon does seem like a bad point to me.

              • David, Jr. says:

                Not falling apart, but he would sure fit nicely into that DH – easy to acquire slot at age 23.

                • Ted Nelson says:

                  Absolutely, but that doesn’t mean that they need him desperately and shouldn’t consider trading him for a really good starting P. It does mean that they need to think hard about it and make sure it’s a good value.

                  I’m not saying “trade Montero!” I’m just saying that I don’t think he’s their only position prospect or that they desperately need him more than a similarly valuable pitcher.

      • Ted Nelson says:

        Pitching prospects are actually considered to be a lot more volatile than hitting prospects, and the consensus is pretty universally that Montero is a better hitting prospect than those two are pitching prospects anyway.

        • Rich in NJ says:

          IOW, TINSTAAPP

          I hope I live to see the day when Montero is so entrenched as a Yankee that no one would ever consider trading him.

        • Steve O. says:

          She was getting at the fact that it’s much easier to acquire big bats through free agency, rather than banking on aces becoming available in free agency.

          • Ted Nelson says:

            Yeah, I think there’s a point there… but I don’t think it’s a HR good point. You also need 9 bats and 5 SP arms… one would expect roughly 80% more hitters of the same quality to hit the market than starting pitchers.

  24. KenC says:

    John Danks is on the trading block!? Yankees should get him. This year doesn’t reflect what he is capable of doing

    • Ted Nelson says:

      Can say that just about every season since 2008. He’s still young and the best may be yet to come… but the price to get him will likely be very high. I’m not saying don’t get him, I’m just saying take the cost into consideration.

      • Guns of the Navarone says:

        I would really prefer Floyd if it’s true that both are available. But I’m sure his asking price is higher. I’d be happy with either pitcher provided the Yankees don’t pay an ace-like haul for him.

    • Simon says:

      I’m not exactly familiar with Danks, I know he is young but what is his potential/ceiling?

  25. Guns of the Navarone says:

    Fuck the Blue Jays. Anthopoulos is such a badass.

  26. Steve O. says:

    ChiSox got Zach Stewart in the deal? That’s a solid haul for two months of E-Jax.

    • Yup, Stewart is a great get. I’ll move the “win” to Chicago’s column, they moved a superfluous starter headed towards free agency for a legit prospect and a useful reliever.

      And while Frasor/Stewart for two months of EJax and Teahen (for a team not in title contention this year) would be a loss in the abstract, flipping EJax for Rasmus makes that a win for TOR as well.

      • Steve O. says:


        Although some people might place this in the “loss” column for KW, because E-Jax was flipped for such a great player.

        • Sayid J. says:

          Although, don’t you have to ask, if the Sox preferred Rasmus, why wouldn’t they have just cut the Jays out of the deal? Maybe they preferred Stewart.

          • Guns of the Navarone says:

            Plus the White Sox DESPERATELY need relief help.

          • Steve O. says:

            It’s unclear what else the Jays have traded for Rasmus.

            If it’s Lawrie/Drabek/Deck McGuire/E-JAx, then it’s a terrible move for the Jays, and the ChiSox probably wouldn’t have those prospects to offer.

            It’s wait and see for the moment.

          • I could see the White Sox preferring to deal EJax to the Jays for a Stewart-centric package instead of dealing him to the Cards directly for a Rasmus-centric package, because the White Sox need young starting pitching more than they need young outfielders.

            If you move Jackson for Rasmus directly, StL isn’t giving you back an arm remotely on Stewart’s level. No chance.

            • Sayid J. says:

              Right, that’s why I don’t think the fact that the Jays got Rasmus should reflect poorly on KW. It looks like KW actually did a decent job here.

      • Thomas says:

        Assuming it is Jackson for Rasmus straight up. Dierkes thinks (and I agree) the Blue Jays will have to give up more.

        • True, but as it stands right now, it’s Jason Frasor, Zach Stewart, and stuff for Colby Rasmus and Mark Teahen (who could also potentially be flipped).

          Unless that stuff is Drabek AND Lawrie, it’s probably still a win for the Jays; Rasmus is a stud CF with power and tons of team control left. He’s worth two or three great prospects, or a great prospect and a couple of superfluous major leaguers.

          (Baseless speculation: what if the “stuff” is Anthony Gose? It would be a nice insurance policy for the Cards for losing Rasmus, and Gose is far off enough that it wouldn’t hurt the Jays a ton to let him go.)

  27. Monteroisdinero says:

    Keep Montero or else I may become DankseeisaYankee.

    /not happy

    • Steve O. says:

      I want to keep Montero too. A young power hitting C/DH in the Victor Martinez mold has immense value. If he produces above average production he’ll have more value when he gets to the majors.

      There’s also the risk of never getting that value from him, and having some of his shine wear off.

      But, if he comes out of the gate with instant success, his trade value will skyrocket.

  28. bonestock94 says:

    If AA is this brilliant the Jays have to get good soon.

    • Guns of the Navarone says:

      You won’t have to wait long. With all the talk about the Orioles rising to prominence during the offseason, it’s the Blue Jays that may leapfrog the Rays in the coming years. They’ve got the pitching potential… and an actual offense.

      • Ted Nelson says:

        Not to say that AA can’t make the Jays a contender, but take Bautista (acquired by Ricciardi) away from the Jays and they’re probably not much better than the Orioles. Take Romero away along with Bautista… and they’re probably a lot worse than the Orioles.

        AA has only had 2 years on the job and of course any GM will inherit some talent… just saying that to date AA has made some good moves but he also inherited some talent (Halladay was also inherited of course). His work so far is as much potential at this point as actual results.

  29. Reggie C. says:

    All this commotion and yet I think the new guy in next season’s rotation will be CJ Wilson. Spend the money, not the “high ceiling” prospects. Thats just how Cashman has operated. Cashman rolling the dice with Colon and Hughes remaining effective down the stretch just seems more likely. And the bigger risk.

  30. Grit for Brains says:

    If the Rox are down to Betances or Dellin, Montero and Nova…I’d bet Cash is actively trying to get it done with Montero, Nova, and a couple of lower regarded guys.

    • Guns of the Navarone says:

      (continues worshiping Anthroupolos)

    • Chelo says:

      So for us to have a shot at #Rasmus we would have to trade, #Jesus, ManBam, plus, yet the jays have to give up #jackson and not much else……Sad,

      • Matty Ice says:

        See: Johan Santana.

        • Ted Nelson says:

          The Mets gave up 3 top-100 prospects for Santana as well as an Adam Warren type prospect who had climbed to AAA his 2nd pro season… Hindsight tells us those prospects didn’t work out, but that was a good haul for a pitcher about the sign a fat $20 mill per deal at the time. Taking that over Hughes was a quantity over quality decision, and seeing how Hughes has done since then justifies that thinking somewhat (Hughes just being one example, in general that thinking is defensible as is quality over quantity… no right answer).

      • You’re underrating Edwin Jackson and his trade value. He’s a very good MLB starter.

        Jackson’s worth in a deal is probably equivalent to a good prospect and a fringy one (Betances and Nova?), because Jackson is a legit bonafide above-average MLB player who can contribute towards a pennant race right now.

        He’s not potential, he’s actuality.

        One of the reasons it’s harder for the Yankees to make deals that other teams make is that since we’re in constant title contention, we don’t generally have legit MLB players lying around in surplus to include in a deal, we make prospect-only deals. We can’t afford to trade away the equivalent of an Edwin Jackson (who would be probably Phil Hughes, pre-injury) in order to get a Colby Rasmus, we’re dealing prospects only, and that means we need to include a TON of prospects to mitigate the higher risk of no return on investment.

        • bonestock94 says:

          To play devil’s advocate, this could be a career year rather than what to expect going forward. The large sample size, his career line, is still pretty ugly.

          • He’s been a damn good starter for like 3 years now.

            Plenty of players who are in the majors at 19 have ugly career lines for a while, because at 19-20-21-22 you tend to suck while acclimating yourself to big league play.

          • Ted Nelson says:

            To play devil’s advocate, he was traded for Daniel Hudson and David Holmberg literally one year ago.

            Everyone knew the Cardinals were looking to get rid of Rasmus and didn’t think that highly of him… so if the Yankees had a hole in their OF they were looking to fill, I don’t see why people assume they would have had to give up a kings ransom. They don’t have a hole in their OF, and the Cards are a big-spending contender who probably value MLB talent higher than prospects anyway.

      • Ted Nelson says:

        Just last season Jackson was traded for Daniel Hudson and an 18 year old 2009 2nd rounder. It would have literally taken you one minute to look that up on B-R and save yourself from making a stupid comment.

        And I don’t think there have been any rumors on what the Yankees would have had to part with for Rasmus… because their OF is already arguably the best in baseball so no one really saw them trading for Rasmus.

    • vin says:

      Damn… Anthopoulis strikes again.

  31. 28 this year says:

    Essentially Dotel, Rzepcynski (sp?), and Stewart for Rasmus and Teahen. Not too bad, pretty fair for both sides.

    • 28 this year says:

      i don’t know why i wrote both sides since there are three sides but it looks as though each side did well although the Cardinals essentially got a rental for Rasmus so I don’t know about them.

      • Sayid J. says:

        They were looking to move Rasmus, probably sold a bit low on him.

        • jsbrendog says:

          the rays offered niemann or davis straight up!! wtf are they doing with edwin free agent ive been traded 5 times jackson?

      • Guns of the Navarone says:

        Well if you look at it from their perspective, they obviously were down on Rasmus in the first place. You just don’t trade a 25-year-old CF with that kind of potential. Add that to the fact that they are in the race and in need of pitching and relief help… I think they got what they wanted. It’s a fair deal all around.

        The Blue Jays did end up giving up a lot of pieces for Rasmus. Frasor, Dotel, Rzepcynski, and Zach Stewart (a top prospect)… maybe more coming. That’s a lot of pieces to give for a young player who isn’t exactly proven. They’re going to have to rebuild that bullpen. But all those guys are very replaceable IMO. I think they did a great job.

        • jsbrendog says:

          but they have time to rebuild the pen cause theyre already out of it this yr. this is a great effing move by antroupoloupolsoussoiuslousos

  32. Chelo says:

    Some of the trades Anthroupolos has been able to pull off are unbelievable, he must have some dirt on a lot of the Gms, Owners, Players in baseball or something. He is hustling all the other teams lol

  33. X-62 says:

    The Card’s got fleeced! Someone a young as Rasmus with his upside should only be mived for an elite prospect. The Jays gave up 1 good but not great prospect and spare parts.

    • YankeesJunkie says:

      The Cards were basically giving away Rasmus because LaRussa is a dipshit. Great move by Alex A. in getting Rasmus, but in reality it did take 4 or 5 players.

    • YanksFan in MA says:

      Cardinals basically sided with LaRussa over Rasmus. Just a fuckin terrible decision.

  34. Downs says:

    Does anyone else agree that Danks would be better for the yankees than Ubaldo? I think Danks could be had for Betances and Nova. I would rather get Danks and keep Jesus and ManBan than Trade for Ubaldo

    • Guns of the Navarone says:

      I really want to keep Montero.

      • Downs says:

        I live a half an hour from Triple-A scranton/wilkes-barre and Jesus can rake forreal and his catching skills aren’t AS bad as everyone likes to say. He’s going to be a very special hitter.

  35. Steve O. says:

    If the reports of the E-Jax-Rasmus deal are true, then holy shit.

    The Jays are going to be a couple of free agent signings away from being a legitimate contender. Imagine, Prince Fielder/Albert Pujols and CJ Wilson.

    They’d be loaded.

    • Dismortologist says:

      Cashman is signing Wilson. Book it!

    • Ted Nelson says:

      I think it’s a good point that the Jays are putting themselves in a good position to do that, but I would still say that they need to catch a lot of breaks to be contending with the Sox and Yankees in the near future. Basically they’re in a great position, but still have a long way to go.

      Throwing $45-50 mill per at Fielder and Wilson might be the move to get them over the top, but it would probably stretch their budget to the point where prospects would need to hit at a really high rate. Struggles from key young guys like Drabek and Snyder could keep them from really contending in the AL East. They have another ~$42 mill tied up in Joey Bats, Aaron Hill, Romero, Escobar, Lind, and Encarnacion… all but Hill (and even his is short) on very reasonable deals, just that it adds up. Rasmus and Morrow are hitting arb.

      • The Fallen Phoenix says:

        I’m pretty sure the blue jays don’t max out at $100m; I could see then going as high as $130 if the talent warrants it. Toronto isn’t a small market by any means.

        • Usty says:

          Toronto is a huge market and don’t overlook the fact that the Canadian dollar is no longer funny looking play money – since it’s now worth more than the US Dollar.

        • Ted Nelson says:

          Who knows, but at $130 mill you would be talking about the 5th highest payroll in the league for 2011.

          Not that this means they wouldn’t go there, but Toronto is at less than 1/2 of that this season.

  36. JM says:

    The Cardinals and White Sox just got pwned by Anthopoulos.

  37. Jedile says:

    I got it this time: JoVa straight up for Zambrano! Is this too much?

  38. Alfredo says:

    if i were the yankees i would give up montero, betances +2 more type b and c prospect. get it done we need a pitcher.

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.