Calling price too high, Yankees exit Santana chase

I beg you pardon! Yes, I meant DON'T! My fault!

Bob wrote:

Drew--
I certainly agree with you that the Sox are the best team in baseball. No argument there!
A question--did you mean "But let's not pretend that these two teams DON'T spend a fortune on their players?" I think that's what you meant-if not, what did you mean?
<quoted text>

Busey wrote:

<quoted text>
I agree the Red Sox are the best team. But winning the WS has nothing to do with it. The best team rarely wins it.
The 83 win Cardinals starring Jeff Weaver were not the best team

Regular season record wise, the Red Sox and Indians tied for the best record in the majors. With winning the WS and having the best record over the entire season, I'd say the Red Sox were the best team, and the best team DID win the World Series.

My friend, what is the barometer for the best team? The 83-win Cardinals were the best team in 2006. Winning the championship gives them the right to make that claim. Were the 2001 Mariners the best team because they dominated in the regular season?
The teams play in different divisions, play different schedule, play different inter-league schedules, etc...it's apples and oranges. The World Series determines the best team for that given season. You have to be decent to get into the post season, then you have to get hot to win it all. Perhaps it's semantics, but at least it's objective. If you refer to team other than the champ as the best team, it's completely subjective and based on opinion.

Busey wrote:

<quoted text>
I agree the Red Sox are the best team. But winning the WS has nothing to do with it. The best team rarely wins it.
The 83 win Cardinals starring Jeff Weaver were not the best team

HarleyRider wrote:

<quoted text>
We won 94 games last year, and look at how many games the bullpen (Farnsworthless) blew. What do you think our record would have been if we had Joba in the pen all year?
As for the RedSux' pitching staff, pitchers 1 - 3 are truly scary. But then again, scary is how our lineup of batters have been described for the past few years, and where did thay get us.

our scary hitters got us beat in the short series playoffs by dominant pitching. yes, i agree we would have won more gmaes with better pen. but lets analyze...Wang was solid all yr, Pettite good all yr too. now is where people are gonna not like me...Clemens when came to Yanks pitched quite a few games into the 7 and 8th giving way to bullpen with just 1 or 2 runs given up and then lost. he wont be here next yr. the young guys will. granted they good but they dont yet have the competetive fire or pride that Clemens does. so we'll see how things pan out. on flip side. winning 95-100 games may not be enuf with Boston pitching Santana, Becket, and Schilling. they may win 105-110 games with that staff.
i really wanted Johan. to me he was the ace in the hole that matched up against anyone in games 1 and 5 of playoffs.(i know we assuming Yanks make playoffs each yr).
other down side is they seem commited to pitching Joba in the starting rotation, so where does that leave the pen. they cant throw these rookies out there for 8-9 innings a game. all the "joba rules" from last yr will prob hold again with 3 rooks...

Drew wrote:

Payroll for Boston isn't nearly what the Yankees is...However, the whole thing is ridiculous. Is it really any fun to root for these teams? I was listening to the radio this morning. Apparently the Marlins payroll will be close to $10 million. The Yankees pay more for than that for a few middle relievers. It's absurd. If it's a free market (big market teams always fall back on that), then let the Marlins move to Brooklyn or Manhattan, build a beautiful park, and compete. The Yankees and Mets would never let it happen...In a free market, the Yankees and Mets would have no say...it's called competition. There's a very unlevel playing field that favors the big market teams in a huge way. It's killing the game. Why would the Marlins trade their best offensive player? Why can't Minnesota keep its best pitcher? When only a few teams can afford quality players, the league needs to change.
<quoted text>

And exactly how much do the Marlins, Twins, Royals, Devil Rays, etc get each year from the Luxury tax? 50 million? 60 million?
While its true these teams will not make the money that the big boys make, due to population, tv networks, etc, it's also a shame that these owners pocket the money they get from the luxury tax, rather than invest it into their teams. These owners should be stripped of their teams.

How many times in recent history has a small market team won the WS? You can build a winner on a budget team, but when you're pocketing all the money, and have 10 million in payroll, you can't expect success, or the fans that success brings.

HOOWAH! Now if the SUX win the next 24 World Series, they will have caught up to the Yankees. THe SKY IS FALLING. Boston is so envious of NY, this is what they need to feel good about themselves.

Go_Yanks wrote:

Does anyone remember Feb. 2004? Yanks just kicked RotSox out of the playoffs then proceeded to acquire the best player in baseball, things were looking good, UNTIL THE GAMES HAD TO BE PLAYED. Moral of the story is: Yanks will be ok, let the RotSox continue to add "stars", be patient. Lest we forget, they too went out in the first round in '05, didn't even make the playoffs in '06. That's why I love baseball, and love the Yanks! Incredible what a 2 for 89 hot streak can do for a teams confidence!

I agree 100%. Everyone is assuming that the Red Sox key players, Lugo, Pedroia, Ellsbury, the ones who played really well in the playoffs, are going to be lights out again next year. I know, if they get the pitching the expect ( if they get Santana) they do look formidable. However, Beckett has been inconsistent up until this year, Schilling is just as big a question as Mussina, Matsuzaka is at best a 3 starter, Wakefield is a .500 pitcher and the rookies are question marks just like the Yankee rookies will be. Like you said, the games still have to be played and anything can happen in baseball. I think Santana is going to stay in Minnesota anyway, especially after they just saw the Tigers give up 6 players for a star and a questionable pitcher.

Anyone care to comment on whether Santana is damaged goods or not? I heard that he stopped throwing his slider late in the season and was 2-5 with a 5+ ERA. Was it fatigue or potential rm problems?

Drew wrote:

2 for 89...typical Yankees fan...get with the program, you're living in the last century. For this century, Red Sox 2 Yankees 0. The Red Sox are a better baseball team now, obviously. Let the he Red Sox add stars! That's funny...as if the Yankees are winning with kids making the MLB minimum!
<quoted text>

Last century? What team has won more rings in the last decade? That would be the Yankees!!!

yankeeguy1947 wrote:

Anyone care to comment on whether Santana is damaged goods or not? I heard that he stopped throwing his slider late in the season and was 2-5 with a 5+ ERA. Was it fatigue or potential rm problems?

steroids?

Go figure wrote:

<quoted text>
I agree 100%. Everyone is assuming that the Red Sox key players, Lugo, Pedroia, Ellsbury, the ones who played really well in the playoffs, are going to be lights out again next year.

Lets keep in mind that Pedroia struggled the first two months of the year...Lugo struggled pretty much all year...J.D. Drew struggled most of the year and Ellsbury didn't start playing until late July. Bottom line, the Sox still won many regular season games while many players went through difficult times. It's part of baseball...its part of professional sports regardless of which sport it is.

Fairfax wrote:

These prospects had better be every bit as good as the Yankees hope they are, because take a look at what the Red Sox starting rotation will be next season if they land Santana:
Johan Santana
2007 stats: 15-13, 3.33 ERA
Career stats: 93-44, 3.22
Josh Beckett
2007 stats: 20-7, 3.27 ERA
Career stats: 77-52, 3.74
Curt Schilling
2007 stats: 9-8, 3.87 ERA
Career stats: 216-146, 3.46
D. Matsuzaka
2007 stats: 15-12, 4.40 ERA
Career stats: 15-12, 4.40
Clay Buchholz
2007 stats: 3-1, 1.59 ERA
Please note that Buchholz is considered every bit as good as Phil Hughes.
That would be a great rotation in any era, in this day and age it's simply phenomenal.

Truer words were never spoken. This could be more than a nightmare.

i am glad yanks kept the kids. i think they need an ace, maybe joba is it. next year payroll changes as dead wood jason, moose, and pavano go...

Uncle Jack wrote:

<quoted text>
Lets keep in mind that Pedroia struggled the first two months of the year...Lugo struggled pretty much all year...J.D. Drew struggled most of the year and Ellsbury didn't start playing until late July. Bottom line, the Sox still won many regular season games while many players went through difficult times. It's part of baseball...its part of professional sports regardless of which sport it is.

hey jack, good to see you again..hang around here, most posters gone...let mouse know to come in here also...

Clay Bucholz is not projected to be just as good as Phil Hughes. Hughes is projected at 1 or 2 in the Top 100 while Clay has been between 46 and 55.

Yanks are blowing it big time if they don't deal for Santana. Daily news reported that it was Hughes, Cabrera, Marquez, and some lower level 3rd base prospect. Yanks don't have an ace to compete against Beckett, Santana, or Sabathia, Carmona, or Verlander, Bonderman. Heck, they can't even compete against a John Lackey for christ sakes. You have the best pitcher, left handed in Yankee stadium too, and you decide to penny pinch now????? You give MO $15m, Igawa $10m avg, Pavano $10m, Abreu $16m, Damon $12m, and you decide to penny pinch? Pitching wins especially in short series. Don't make Hughes or Kennedy out to be the next Cy Young, which Santana already is twice. You can't expect anything from Moose. Wang is good but not great. Thats the problem the past few years, good pitching but not great, and you need that in post season. But Yanks won't even get there now because Boston will win the East, Detroit the central, Anaheim the west, and then you got Cleveland as the wild card. You spend all that money on your payroll and when you need that final piece, you let it go. At least stay in it to bring the price up for Boston like they were doing. Don't give away your whole hand and let the other team get a free pass. On top of that Cashman is stupid to let tell the press that Yankees won't pay $20m+. That means Sox don't have to give up as many prospects and don't have to offer as much $$$$ to sign Santana, because its out there that Yanks wouldn't pay that price even if Santana was a free agent, so maybe Santana thinks twice about going free agency and signs with Sox for less that what he wants. Even if Yanks really don't want to trade and sign Santana, at least pretend to to up the price for others. All you fans better pray Angels swoop in last minute to get Santana. At least then its more balanced competition. Otherwise if Sox get him then Yankees will be paying $200m every year for the next 5 years and not get into post season. Think about that Cashman, thats $1B. If you're not going all out, then why bother signing AROD back, if the result will be the same without great pitching?????????Yanks don't have a great team now. They didn't have a great team last year. THey got lucky and if anything, they're just older this year. I just hope they don't do a knee jerk reaction if Santana goes to Boston and trade for Haren, because he is not great either. If anything, try and get Kazmir at least!!!

Bob S wrote:

Good move not getting Santana at that price. To give up that much young talent and then to have to pay a gazillion dollars on top to Santana is too much. If Santana is smart, he'll veto any trade, play thru this year with the Twins and make even more money next year when teams do not have to compensate the Twins too.
Yanks were competitive last year without their best pitchers and the young pitchers available all season. RedSux had a bunch of careeer years and barely won the East

Did you watch last season???The Yankees were not competitive, they got lucky and rode on AROD's back. Their "best pitchers" can't match up with Boston, Detroit, Cleveland, or even the Angels. Santana will not become free agent if another team is giving him close to what he's asking because of fear of injury or bad year. If he's traded, he's signing. While all the fans keep hyping of these rookie pitchers, you have to remember they're all just prospects. Anything can happen. Maybe only Joba is a sure thing. Hughes seems injury prone. While you wait for these guys to develop, all your position players are old and past their prime. By the time your pitchers pan out, you have no more offense. Gotta go for it now!!!!!

All of you fans feel confident and talk tough now, but as soon as the first blowout against these pitchers come, you'll be screaming why didn't Yanks get Santana. He's the difference maker and anytime you can get a young ACE lefthander for Yankee stadium you gotta do it!!

jim wrote:

<quoted text>hey jack, good to see you again..hang around here, most posters gone...let mouse know to come in here also...

i'm still here Jim. few of us talk sensibly and realistically about what is going on. no time for BS bashing etc...just a conv about facts and opinions.
me-i would love to have Santana and would give Hughes,Melky and another young kid and to keep Kennedy throw in some more cash.

hey guys. i agree just about 100% with David in the last 2 posts. Santana was/is the guy Yanks need to match up in short series. i said it since the beginning. and now Detroit gonna throw out Bonderman, Verlander and Dontrell. Boston will be throwing Dice-K as their weak link?
we saw what happened past season with Sabathia and Carmona-we crumbled, were baffled trying to get a hit. Santana was the guy to match up in games 1 and 4. nothing against Hughes,Kennedy or Joba but prospects are just that.hopes to be good. Santana is already good and proven.