Jan
21

Core Values: New York Yankees

By

Just a heads up, my first post with CBS is live and yeah, it has to do with the Yankees. Don’t blame me, they said something about starting out in my comfort zone. Anyway, the post is part of our series looking at each team’s core, so head on over and check it out. [/self promotion]

Categories : Asides, Self-Promotion

112 Comments»

  1. Hoss says:

    Mike,
    D+? What is that: Crap topped with a cherry? I have to agree that the Yankee future is not bright at this point for all of the reasons cited in your article. The RAB consensus of 6 is way too optimistic.
    How can you not put some of the responsibility on Cashman and the FO for leaving the team in this precarious position?

    • jjyank says:

      A 6 is optimistic?

    • Get Phelps Up says:

      “The RAB consensus of 6 is way too optimistic.”

      Says this guy.

      • Havok9120 says:

        I was wondering if someone would dig that up.

        • Hoss says:

          And why don’t you go ahead and dispute something in there. Based on facts. Is the catching situation better? Third base? Outfield?
          Is the future bright based on today’s position? Read Mike’s article instead of just slamming people.

          • Havok9120 says:

            I have little to no problem with any point you raise there. I have a problem with the scale you use to grade the Yanks in relation to the rest of the league and, especially, the division.

            Almost no one is saying the Yanks didn’t get worse from last season to this season. But you often make it sound as if they lost 20 wins on paper while the rest of the division is vastly improved. As if the Yankees are the only ones with question marks, injury concerns, and need good luck to win the division.

            • Hoss says:

              With this roster, they will finish 4th in the division. Remember, every team in the division (except Boston) has young major league players that are still improving and better high (AA-AAA) minors prospects than the Yankees.

              The Blue Jays have taken big strides to improve their team through trades and free agency. Absent some solid additions to Yanks, there will be a 3-team race with the Yanks and Bosox on the outside looking in. How bizarre is that?!

              • Mike Axisa says:

                How do you figure they’re going to finish behind the Orioles? Baltimore won’t have a historic record in one-run and extra-inning games again.

                • Hoss says:

                  Mike, The Orioles have some young pitching that is still maturing and improving, their lineup will be better with Machado and Roberts every day all season, and Showalter is a good manager who can do the best with what he’s been given. They also have talent like Bundy on the way up. What do we have that may make an impact this year?

                  • Ted Nelson says:

                    Not only do the Yankees have Nova and Phelps, but I also don’t see much reason to believe in the Os young SP already in MLB. Most have failed for multiple seasons in MLB or have mid-rotation ceilings. Not every young SP is a success if you just wait long enough.

                    Roberts? He hasn’t played 60 games since 2009. Why are they getting a full season? I guess Youk and ARod will be playing 300 Gs each for the Yankees this season too? Maybe sign Sizemore and Nick Johnson for a guaranteed 162 games each of All-World production?

                    The Yankees don’t have to match Machado and Bundy, because they have a better roster. At this point the playoffs are still decided by team wins and not the number of hot shot prospects you have.
                    Still, the Yankees have a number of prospects who could make an impact this season: Romine, Adams, Warren, Whitley, Montgomery, CoJo, or any of about 8 OFs between AA and AAA could step up and contribute. The Os have little in their farm behind Bundy and then Gausman, who I don’t think will be up in 2013.

                    • Hoss says:

                      Ted, I really don’t want to argue with someone who makes statements like “The Yankees don’t have to match Machado and Bundy, because they have a better roster,” then says nothing to back up that statement. You asked for improvements, I gave them to you. Their team matched the Yankees game for game until the final weekend of the season and lost only Kevin Reynolds. The Yankees have had several important personnel losses.
                      And yes, older players do tend to get injured more than younger ones. It’s one of the reasons they retire. With an entire team that has a very high average age like the Yankees, you are playing with fire. Especially if there is no one at AAA to back up without a significant drop.

                    • jjyank says:

                      Who the hell is Kevin Reynolds? I assume you mean Mark?

                      The O’s added jack shit, lost a huge power threat in MARK Reynolds, and are very, very, very, unlikely to repeat their historic 1-run-game marathon.

                      The Jays have just as many holes than the Yankees, and are starting off from a worse roster.

                      The Rays are good, but lost Shields (Meyers may work out for them, but I doubt for 2013). Their offense is pretty terrible.

                      The Red Sox lost Gonzalez, Beckett, and Crawford. Yes, a win for them in salary dump world, but Victorino? Napoli? *shrug*

                      Stop overrating everyone else and underrating the one team you claim to actually like.

                    • Ted Nelson says:

                      It’s not worth it, JJ.

              • Havok9120 says:

                The Jays took steps with players who are making a massive league switch (why was this such a bugaboo with Kuroda but these guys are gonna be totally fine?), often with a scary injury history to boot. Most of these guys were all on the same Marlins team that spun its wheels all last season. They’re a lot better (though I doubt 20 games better), but they’ve got a ton of red flags.

                Baltimore has made precisely zero improvements, and are unlikely to repeat the performance in close games that made their record competitive. I’m not sure that the injury argument even plays very well considering who it was that was injured.

                What has Tampa done to improve, exactly? Sure, they should get Longo for a full season again, which is a huge help, but that improves their offense from terrible to merely bad. Their pitching will probably be worse for now. They certainly aren’t tons worse on paper, but I fail to see where the improvements are that put them head and shoulders above the Yanks.

                • Ted Nelson says:

                  What is even the Orioles injury argument? I always see it, but no one will back it up. Nick Johnson and Brian Roberts had to be better bets to get hurt than not to. Markakis missed a good stretch (he’s 3 years younger than Tex, but somehow his is bad luck and Tex’s is a sign he’s done forever…). Hammel got hurt after giving them far more than anyone expected he would. Who else got hurt for them?

                • Hoss says:

                  Don’t count me among those who said there would be a “bugaboo” (whatever that is) for Kuroda because he’s from the NL West. It’s funny, I only hear how crappy it is now when we talk about Ian Kennedy. Never mind the fact that the WS champs have come from that division twice in the last 3 years…. I’ll stop now.
                  They acquired talent. Period. Reyes, Dickey, Johnson, Buehrle. All impact players. They were decimated by injuries last year. So much so that Laffey was in the starting rotation. For a young team, they were destroyed, which is out of the ordinary. Who was injured? Their entire rotation and the best player (Batista), that’s all.

                  • Havok9120 says:

                    I know the Jays were injured. Their response was to pick up injury prone players. You can’t just ignore one aspect of a player and say “they have talent. Period,” just because it doesn’t flow with your narrative. A red flag is a red flag whether it’s wearing pinstripes or a maple leaf. You’ve got a large number of guys either coming off injury or who have earned the “injury prone” tag, so why are they all going to come back equal to what they were or, in the case of the young guys, better? Why is 39 year old Dickey a lock to be just fine while our middle-aged to old guys are all going to fall apart? Why are all their question marks (which you STILL haven’t admitted exist) going to turn out positive while ours implode into disaster and catastrophe?

                    • Hoss says:

                      I am not saying that all of our players will be injured and other teams’ players will be healthy. That is ridiculous. Older teams do run more risk, and the Yankees had the oldest team in the league last year; I expect that the same will be true this year.
                      I based my prediction on current rosters, not injuries. There are some real weaknesses on this Yankee team, and I think that it is foolish to think that you can compete for a title with a team that has lost more than it has gained and does not have players going into their prime production years. No other team in the division has that particular predicament.

                    • Ted Nelson says:

                      Again, you need to consider not just what has been lost and gained but the roster as a whole. The Blue Jays also have massive holes on paper at CF, 2B, and 1B, plus their C isn’t particularly good. They improved a ton, but they were bad to start with so all that improvement might not make them any better than the Yankees.

                      I am not even on the injury questions thing as much as others. Just on the massive holes in their roster and lack of depth. Plus guys coming off career years out of line with what they ever did before 2012: Melky and Encarnacion. Dickey to some extent too.

                  • jjyank says:

                    Talent only helps when they’re on the field. Reyes and Johnson are HUGE injury risks. Dickey is transitioning to a better league/division. Buehrle just sucks. So what’s your point? That if baseball games were played on paper, the Jays would be awesome? Because guess what, so would the Yankees. If A-Rod came back great, Tex had a good year, Cano is Cano, Jeter’s ankle holds up, etc. You get what I’m saying? Every team has holes, and every team needs luck.

                    Proclaiming that they WILL (not could, or might, but will) finish fourth is really, for lack of a better term, fucking stupid.

                  • Barry says:

                    I agree with you the Jays made huge improvements. The yankees downgraded in RF, C, an depth. Everyone hated the Soriano deal until Rivera went down. Swisher is a better player than Ichiro at this point. Youkillis is better than Chavez if he stays healthy. Martin was at times a liability as a hitter but way less so than this years tandem will be. Our rotation is what this team hinges on and there is no guaranter we will get that production again.

                    I think its a very real possibility he Yankees have their worst season since the early nineties. I voted five earlier, mostly because this team seems to be caught in the middle.

              • Ted Nelson says:

                It’s bizarre (or just wrong) because you ignored the starting point completely and focused only on improvements. If I added 20 sq ft to my house in an extension and you added 100, that doesn’t mean you have a bigger house. I could have started with more than an 80 sq ft advantage.

                You’re also making extreme assumptions about age curves. It’s a general thing for the average player. Young players tend to be far more volatile than vets. Every player over 30 doesn’t just suddenly fall off a cliff every season. There’s a risk of it, but 30-31 or 33-34 or even 38-39 doesn’t suddenly trigger something where every player gets substantially worse than they were a year ago.

                Even within your odd structure… What have the Os or Rays done to improve? Os added nothing from outside the org after a really lucky year where their wins didn’t match their production. Rays have to replace a lot of lost production between Shields, Upton, and Keppinger’s 2012. Take a look at their OF, C, and DH situation.
                Jays added a ton, but they still have like 4 huge holes in their line-up on paper, back to my house analogy. Look at their CF, 1B, C, and 2B.

                • jjyank says:

                  I agree completely, Ted. I’d also just like to add that the improvements the Jays made have a ton of injury risk as well. Josh Johnson is great, but he’s broken 200 IP exactly ONCE in his entire career. He’s only crakced 180 IP 4 times since he was a rookie in 2005. Jose Reyes will have to play 81+ games on turf. Bautista is coming back from a wrist injury, which has a notorious reputation of sapping power (at least initially).

                  They’re getting far too much love this offseason, in my opinion.

                • Hoss says:

                  See my response above about the Os and Jays. As far as the Rays, I would never count them out with that pitching and that manager. Best in baseball. They may even sign Bourn to take over in CF for Upton, which would be an upgrade.

                  • Ted Nelson says:

                    See my comment above for why your comments are lacking.

                    So we should count the Rays romured possibilities in their favor? What are you smoking exactly?

                    No one is saying to count any of those teams out. We are wondering why you have decided that it’s a three team race not including the Yankees…

                    • Hoss says:

                      Ted, I really don’t want to argue with someone who makes statements like “The Yankees don’t have to match Machado and Bundy, because they have a better roster,” then says nothing to back up that statement. You asked for improvements, I gave them to you. Now leave me alone.

                    • Havok9120 says:

                      Well…no. He asked you to explain why the initial talent level doesn’t factor into the argument while the potential talent level does.

                      There aren’t a ton of people who would argue that Baltimore had the better roster last season or that they didn’t outperform the roster they had, yet they still lost out (in both the playoffs and the regular season) to a Yankee team which had dealt with a significant number of injuries and setbacks. Ted is arguing that they are starting from a lower point, so the addition of prospects, even if they turn out to be improvements, does not automatically catapult the Os over the Yankees.

                    • Ted Nelson says:

                      I am not arguing with you. I am trying to point out factors you have failed mention is your assessment that the Yankees are not contenders in 2013.

                      Here is the backup for my statement: http://www.fangraphs.com http://www.baseball-reference.com. When I say “better” I mean that they have performed better on the baseball field and are expected to do so going forward.

    • dalelama says:

      Mike,

      I am glad I have dragged you, kicking and screaming the whole way, to my point of view. You could have least given me some credit in the article…LOL

      The Dal E

  2. Havok9120 says:

    I wasn’t around last night, so I’ll just add my congratulations to you here, Mike. This is a great opportunity. And this is quite a good debut.

    I do worry about RAB though, especially since it’s pretty much been a one man show since October, at least content-wise.

  3. Upstate Yanks says:

    Eh its been fun here, good to see you got a bump Mike. The lack of posts on RAB are sort of frustrating, off to Pinstriped Bible.

  4. MannyGeee says:

    Not gonna lie to you, very interesting take on that site from many of the bloggers. I dig it.

  5. Mike HC says:

    Congrats on the new gig, Mike. Good first article as well. Weird to see an article about the Yanks “core” without any Mo or Pettitte references though.

  6. Camd80 says:

    I am not as high on CC as the rest of you…..I think last year was an enormous struggle for him…..Granted the injuries etc…..He needs to have a great year for the Yanks to compete. In fact….I’m looking at a lot of under performers ….Tex ? Really Tex ? Get tougher man. We need tough from you. Gardner needs to learn how to STEAL ! Everybody should have Franky Cervelli’s hustle and Grandy has to plug the hole in his bat….Hal Steinbrenner is weak and cheap and needs to be slapped around by his dad…..and Cashmen has become a homosexual.

  7. Jerry says:

    Reading that post caused a single tear to roll down my cheek for two reasons. One, pride that the driving force behind one of my favorite sites has hit the big time. Two, sadness that the brute force juggernaut of the Yankees mid-90s dynasty is really and truly gone.

    I think the next few years will definitely be an adjustment. On the other hand, our peaks have been higher and our valleys are not likely to be as low as some franchises, so we are all pretty lucky.

    Keep up the good work, and let’s all keep our fingers crossed that some of these prospects make it to the show soon.

  8. Austin Aunelowitzky says:

    Congratulations on the new gig. Nice opening act.

  9. Blake says:

    I think mikes grade is pretty accurate based on what they are grading for. The hope is that the A ballers become AA ballers and then big leaguers in the near future and help form a new core that’ll increase the grade.

    This almost has to happen for them to win and stay on this budget

    • Havok9120 says:

      Yeah, I had little to no problem with the grade given the parameters, and I think most commenters know that I’m far more optimistic about the team’s future potential than most are. There are just a lot of question marks that cannot be properly assessed until the club (and all the MiLB affiliates) have played a month or two.

      • Cris Pengiucci says:

        +1. Based on the parameters, this seems to be fair, perhaps just a little harsh, but understandable. We also need to understand that Mike is writing to a larger, more diverse audience, the majority of whom are most likely not Yankee fans. Nice to see that he can write a “fair and balanced” assessment.

        (I sometimes think he’s a bit harsh on here, but with a touch of optimism.)

  10. Ted Nelson says:

    That seems like a pretty flawed definition of “core.”

    If CC, Cano, Gardner, and Robertson is a D, the vast majority of MLB teams are at an F.

    • Blake says:

      Did you read it? Cano isn’t signed beyond next year so he doesn’t count

      • Ted Nelson says:

        Did you read my comment?

        • Blake says:

          Yes you said that if a team that has Sabathia and Cano and Robertson and Gardner gets a D then most teams would get an F…..well based on the criteria which the story was written only Sabathia applies because Cano is a FA after 2013 and Gardner and Robertson after 2014.

        • Cris Pengiucci says:

          But the point, Ted, is that Cano isn’t counted in the group that makes them a D+. It may be a flawed definition, but that’s the definition being used to determine the grade. Using your definition (or the players you included in what you believe should be the core) and the grade is likely higher, therefore leaving room for other teams to be graded higher than an F.

          • Ted Nelson says:

            That has nothing to do with my comment. I said that it was a flawed definition, IMO. Then I gave evidence to support my claim: a team with the Yankees’ core should not be a D+.

            • Cris Pengiucci says:

              I agree with you. A team with the core you define shouldn’t be a D+. However, a team with a core as defined by the article Mike wrote might be deserving of that grade.

              • TomH says:

                It’s no use arguing with him. His post was taken down quite accurately, leaving him nothing more than these you-didn’t-read-me-properly responses, always a sign of embarrassment.

                • dalelama says:

                  RAB rule #2—Ted is never wrong.

                  • Ted Nelson says:

                    Rule #1 – dalelama never contributes anything of any value to the board.

                    You are a sick and twisted individual to get any pleasure from spending so much time taunting the fans of a team that is so much more successful than the team you root for. When the Yankees again win 20 more games than the Mets in 2013, we will all have a good laugh.

                    I usually just ignore you and your ridiculous comments, but if you’d like to come at me it will be all too easy to tear you apart on a regular basis.

                    • Steve says:

                      Especially when you have appointed yourself judge jury and executioner.

                    • Ted Nelson says:

                      Yes, I have judged dalelama. Not everyone else on the blog.

                      Do you make any real comments here, by the way? Or just stalk me?

                • Ted Nelson says:

                  No, Cris appears to understand my point. Because he literally agrees with it completely in the comment you responded to.

                  • Andy Pettitte's Fibula says:

                    He’s not agreeing with you. He’s trying to tell you nicely you created a strawman by making up your own definition of “core” that somehow includes Cano when Mike’s definition, the one the article is based upon and the one that everyone else is discussing does NOT include Cano as part of the core.

                    He said based upon the parameters set forth by the article, a D+ might be a deserving grade.

                    • Ted Nelson says:

                      No. He is restating my point exactly. I never once disagreed with Mike’s grade. I disagreed with the rubric.

                      I specifically said that I disagreed with the definition of core being used, then I said that the Yankees real core is not a D by any reasonable standard.

                      Is that so hard to understand? Why is it that only the really bad commenters like you and Tom have an issue understanding that?

                    • Andy Pettitte's Fibula says:

                      If CC, Cano, Gardner, and Robertson is a D, the vast majority of MLB teams are at an F.

                      Who are you responding to since No one stated that specific core could be graded a “D” ? Everyone else was discussing the core as defined by Mike without Cano which reasonable can be graded a D+.

                      Myself, Cris, Blake, Tom H and Dalelama all can clearly see you created a strawman.

                      It’s obvious to everyone except you which is kind of sad and makes me feel sorry for you.

                    • Ted Nelson says:

                      Why are you speaking for Cris here?

                      I’ve explained this very clearly. I was saying that this is not a D core based on what I consider to be a better definition of core. “If”… That implies that I am speaking hypothetically. If they are a D most others are an F. Therefore, they are not a D. It’s really, really simple.

                      It is not my fault that your reading comprehension is so poor. This is consistently a problem where it is you creating strawman arguments because you don’t understand simple points I make.

                    • Andy Pettitte's Fibula says:

                      So sad that the mentally ill like you have absolutely no insight into their own pathological behaviors.

                    • Ted Nelson says:

                      So, you are wrong and want to insult me instead of admitting it?

                      Thanks for playing. Maybe you can finally win next round.

  11. Blake says:

    When you only have one player signed long term that’s performing to their contract and no impact players really close in the upper levels of the farm system then it’s tough to give the Yanks a good grade under the parameters of the exercise…..doesn’t mean that can’t change quickly if they sign Cano and the Slade Heathcotts and Gary Sanchezs emerge in the next couple of years though and if doesn’t mean the Yanks can’t win in 2013 either…..it’s just that at the moment….they don’t really have much you’d consider a long term “core”

    • Ted Nelson says:

      Even within the silly parameters, they have an ace with a ridiculous track record, one of the most popular players maybe in history, and a farm that BA ranks close to the top third in the league.

      You’re probably still failing half the league by that criteria if the Yankees are a D+.

      • JAG says:

        Future Face of the Franchise is certainly a strange element to include in the core. I assume it’s largely a placeholder for rating the team’s farm system. After all, how much do the Angels or the Nationals need a “future” Face of the Franchise when their current Faces of the Franchise (Trout, Harper, and Strasburg) are all young and under team control for a lot of years?

        • Ted Nelson says:

          Whole thing is a bit strange. Mariners, especially, (Felix, Ichiro, Smoak) and the Astros (Pence, Berkman, Bourn?) might have graded out pretty well in terms of this CBS “core” back in 2010, yet they have stunk the last two years.

  12. Robinson Tilapia says:

    I wasn’t around for the big announcement either, Mike. Congratulations. I remember well when this site was on its original design and just getting started. For this to be leading to the opportunities it is for you is just awesome.

    Hope you enjoyed your trip as well and, if you’re not back yet, stay a few extra days. A 50-degree drop in a few hours isn’t fine.

    Nice first write-up as well. Feel free to drop a few RAB memes every now and then on their asses.

  13. Mickey Scheister says:

    Great article. Congrats Mike!

  14. Vern Sneaker says:

    Congratulations, Mike. On the other hand, core shmore. If our pitching performs to potential and Jeter comes back well and we make a good bench move or two, we’re going to compete seriously for the playoffs and that’s what matters. Prospect projection, which I love, often turns out wrong and then there are injuries, trades, etc. so while it’s all great fun a D+ core (or whatever grade anyone gives it) is little more than that if we can win 92-95 games now.

  15. austinmac says:

    Good article and much success with your new gig.

    An outfielder with no power and an eighth inning guy are not exactly core players.

  16. tyrone sharpton says:

    mike axisa: BAMF. good to know you’ll get paid by someone while quenching your never-ending thirst for Yankee blog-writing

  17. Andy Pettitte's Fibula (formerly Manny's BanWagon) says:

    Congrats Mike.

    While I think a D+ may be a bit harsh, I do agree that if you take Cano out of the equation, the only upper echelon caliber core player besides Robertson is really CC and he’s gonna be 33 with well above 2500 innings on his arm. Teix and Arod are getting worse by the year and I can’t see Jeter being about to stay at SS for more than a year or 2 at most.

    None of the minor league guys can be considered core players at least until they show they’re capable of playing in the majors.

    • dalelama says:

      The stench of the decay is strong.

      • Andy Pettitte's Fibula (formerly Manny's BanWagon) says:

        You’re taking it a step too far IMO. I still think they’re a strong contender in 2013 but to quote Mike,

        New York appears to have run into the perfect storm that, at some point in the next few years, could see them miss the playoffs in consecutive seasons for the first time in nearly two decades.

    • RetroRob says:

      I agree with Mike’s points and there are no surprises to the RAB community. They’ve been discussed in more depth in various articles here. The grading is harder to assess since it’s comparative to other teams and their grades. I haven’t read the other compares yet.

      Overall, though, the aging core of the Yankees; the few contracts on the books after 2013 coupled with their high costs; the fact that their best prospects are in the lower level; and the team’s desire to stay below $189M creates more doubt and uncertainty for the first time in about twenty years.

      • Andy Pettitte's Fibula says:

        Exactly.

        If this next group of prospects doesn’t significantly outperform the last group (Killer B’s, Montero and Romine) the Yankees most likely will have to either scrap the budget or watch the playoffs from home, IMO.

        • Ted Nelson says:

          Because the logical base of comparison for a group of prospects is the team’s last group of prospects…

          And because you even defined that last group’s success in any meaningful way… Of the 5 you identify, 4 are still with the org in some way. Mostly still as prospects. They are the current group as much as the last group. You’ve also decided to ignore Nova and Phelps for some reason.

          The Yankees can’t trade some prospects for cost controlled talent, either. Impossible.

          • The Big City of Dreams says:

            They could do that but which ones exactly? They are banking on a number of these guys to make it and build a new core. The excess that they have isn’t going to fetch a marquee player.

            • Ted Nelson says:

              I can’t tell you who they will tor can rade in the next three years, or for what. I don’t think anyone can. Nor do I think anyone could have told you that Swisher or Granderson, for example, could have been Yankees or at what price a year or two ahead of time. I don’t know if you consider those two “marquee,” but they’ve been strong contributors at low AAV.

              It’s also tough to say who they’ll trade vs. keep. A guy could work out well and still be used as a trade piece for an even bigger fish. A High A guy could fetch more in a trade than we expect. Really tough to predict what another GM might do. (See Swisher trade. Or Vernon Wells trade. Or dozens more)

              They don’t have to fetch a “marquee player,” though they might. It could be a solid contributor. It could be a mid-season rental, which Melancon, McAllister, and Mitchell have each landed them, mostly with the tab picked up as I remember. Or it could be a so called “marque player.” Or it could just be a filler in a spot they need someone in.

              CoJo is certainly a candidate if he continues to perform in AAA and maybe in an MLB cameo, and Cano is re-signed. The depth they have at SP, RP, OF, and C may work itself out in such a way that they have some excess to trade. (They traded IPK and Melky recently in similar situations. Maybe Melancon too.)

              The best source for a marquee player trade could be the lower minors. Guys like Greg Bird, Campos, Cote, DePaula, Gumbs, Camarena, Hensley, Aune, Bichette, Black, Andujar, Davis, Torrens, etc. could emerge as valuable trade chips in the next 2.5 years. Certainly not all will, but one or two should based on the odds. Even guys they haven’t drafted yet could, especially with a few 1sts this year..

        • Andy Pettitte's Fibula says:

          Reading comprehension Ted. I said the next group needs to be better than the last group OR ELSE the Yankees will likely have to open up their wallets.

          As for that last group, Brackman and Montero are gone essentially for nothing unless you’re counting on Pineda and Campos (possible but their injuries aren’t confidence inspiring), Betances has been beyond horrible and was demoted to AA. Banuelos has thrown 60, 129 and 24 innings in the last 3 years now coming off TJS and has lost valuable developmental time. Romine missed almost all last season with a back injury and was terrible when he did play. Nova was 84th out of 99 pitchers in FIP among pitchers who threw 150 innings last year . While there’s a non zero chance some of these guys do contribute to the Yankees, the odds aren’t looking great for the majority of them and the star on pretty much all of them has dimmed in the last 1-2 years.

          • Ted Nelson says:

            No, I know what what you wrote. I said it was wrong for several reasons. One of those is that the last group’s succes has little relevance. Another is that the “last” group is part of the current group.

            LOL… Pineda and Campos and Romine and Banuelos = nothing because they got injured. No player has ever gotten injured and come back… Just wow.

            How was Nova in 2011? No young SP has ever come back from a bad year.

            • Andy Pettitte's Fibula says:

              You criticize people above for assuming all the riisky players the Blue Jays signed are going to turn out in their favor while all the Yankees risks are gonna turn out worst case scenario.

              Now you do the opposite and it OK, LOL.

              Out of Campos, Pineda, Romine and Banuelos, if they got 1 above average starter and 1 average middle reliever out of the grou, they’d be lucky as hell.

              • Ted Nelson says:

                Assuming the expected return is not assuming the best, but whatever you want to pretend today clown.

                I know that all subtlety is lost on you, but this is getting sad.

  18. jason says:

    well written and added exposure is deserved; cbs is fortunate. however, “core” ~ irrelevant (given rosters typically contain more than 5 players).

  19. I am not the droids you're looking for... says:

    Come October methinks the also-rans will envy this team’s D+ “core”…

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.