2009-10 World Champion Yankees Offseason Thread

For the last damned time, people need to stop misrepresenting my argument. It's not about Coke as a particular stopping point of the deal. It's Coke (a good lefty reliever) in fucking addition to Ian Kennedy (a possible 3-5 rotation guy) and Austin Jackson (who projects to be the same damned player we received, except a lot younger.)

Whatever you feel about Coke, we gave up 3 players, one of which is projected to be the same guy we got back. That's the point.

Now go ahead Dierking, tell me I need to take my meds. :wink:

(Not to mention what talisaynon is saying about Dunn et al. Again, I don't know anything about the guy, but if he gives up a lot of walks that's a problem.)

 

Alio. Dude. We get it. It's about all three of them. Together. As a package. We get it. We really do. :smile:

BUT... you said you wouldn't have a problem if it were Jackson and Kennedy minus Coke. To me, that's like, back in the baseball card trading days, being upset with a 1984 Mattingly for a 1987 McGwire trade because someone asked for a 1990 Kevin Mitchell to be included. You'd be okay with the trade, except they asked for a pretty common card to be included?

Right. But if two of the players are expendable (more or less), what's the worry?

You don't walk away from an already good/great deal on a new car because the salesman refuses to throw in free floor mats.

Of course it is a problem. But it's also a problem when Coke gave up a dinger every third outing. We're not trying to replace Mo here, and bullpen pitchers are notoriously erratic year to year. You make do, or you go get someone better, which isn't hard to do when you're talking about Phil Coke. Is Mike Gonzalez still available?

Here's my bottom line on this, and why I'm confused about your stance: We're talking about the fourth or fifth guy out of the pen. In a deal for a starting CFer, that strikes me as an odd sticking point, regardless of it being a third guy in the trade.

 

Except you're expressly ignoring when I specifically said:

If it were a combination of two of the three, any two of the three, or two of them plus low-level throw aways, I'd have had far less complaint on the trade. The only one where I'd still have an issue would be AJax and Coke, because Kennedy was the most "throw away" of the three, but it still would have ended up being Coke as the accelerator for AJax's polish, which is reasonable.

So no. You obviously don't get it. And frankly, I'm tired of repeating myself. If everyone would stop misrepresenting my position, I would happily stop talking about it.

 

No, dude. I do get what you're trying to say. It just makes no sense to me. I don't understand the reasoning behind it.

And I'm not ignoring what you specifically said. In fact, the part you put in bold is the exact quote I am questioning. I understand what you're saying. I just don't understand WHY you'd say those things.

One issue I have is I think I'd disagree that Kennedy is the "most throw away" of the three. Even a decent #5 starter is more valuable than what Coke was to the Yanks last year.

Secondly, I don't understand why it's just an issue of numbers when you're talking about these three pieces that aren't essential to this team. Two is good. Three is bad.

It really is like my analogy above with the baseball cards... you're trading two $3 cards (that might one day be worth $8 each) and a $.04 common card for a $10 card... and you're upset about the inclusion of the common card.

The Yanks are getting good quality talent. They're giving up two decent prospects and middling talent from the bullpen. But the one you've said you're most upset about is Coke. (Yes, yes, I get that it's the "whole package," but you've said it's Coke that bothers you and you'd be okay if he wasn't in the deal. That is the part that I find confusing.)

This doesn't make sense to me.

And, no, I'm not trying to argue with you or give you a hard time. I'm having a conversation and enjoying the discussion while trying to understand your point of view. (I feel like I have to put this disclaimer into every post I make to you now.)

 

The Yankees got Jaime Hoffman in the Rule IV draft, and are going to give him a chance to compete in Spring Training for a job. Supposedly there is interest in other clubs acquiring Melky and/or Gardner.

Interestingly enough, the 40-man now only has 37 players on it. I'm curious to see who fills it out. Obviously Damon would make it 38, but that's two spots. There have to be some guys in the minors hoping the Yankees don't make too many moves this winter.

 

Read an interesting comparison regarding Granderson: Right down to the "decline" and the shitty splits vs. lefties.

Know who it was?








Paul O'Neill.

It's a pretty freaky comparison.

 

Yeah, i heard the same thing...maybe on WFAN.

Also, your baseball card analogy of the deal was on the money, IMO.
The Yankees clearly got the best player in the trade, at least for the next couple of seasons.
If Jackson turns into a stud, good for Detroit. I really think it was worth the risk.

Granderson is an exciting, high-energy, high-character player, and I think we're all going to love watching him in pinstripes. If he has to sit against a tough lefty starter, I'll live with that, as long as he also hits 30+ homers, steals 30+ bases, and hits 10 triples.....which is very possible.

Now lets sign Lackey and Mike Gonzalez and start the season already!

 

The more I think about it, the more this is how I'm starting to feel, especially because the Yanks will only have so many more shots at this with Jeter, Pettitte, Mo, and A-Rod.

If Jackson turns into a stud 3-4 years from now, he'll be Granderson... on a team that will likely have a much less productive Jeter and A-Rod, and no Mo.

Win it again this year. Two for the thumb!

 

So this guy really liked the deal and thinks the Yankees come out smelling like roses.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/20.../12/10/curtis.granderson/index.html?eref=sihp

 

how different history could be... (Source)

 

Well, Wang has now officially become a Free Agent after the Yankees declined to offer him a contract before the 12am deadline.

Good. Fuck him.

 

Wang = Pennington = Noodlearms

 

I hope they bring him back on a minor league deal.

 

Sad falling from Ace to let go in less than 2 seasons.

 

Terrible (filler)

 

Wow that's not a response I expected from a real Yankee fan...

The guy was very good to you for a few years and he got hurt it's not like he turned his back on the franchise. Your response reaks of 96er.

 

It was a brilliant move by the Yankees.... Granderson is an awesome player and he is going to thrive in that stadium and city. I'll never understand why people get upset about trading away prospects for studs. Yes Jackson is projecting to be a good player but he hasn't even faced a pitch in the majors yet. I'd take Granderson over every position player on the Mets right now (although that's not saying alot). He is adynamic OF, can hit for power and is a great guy on top of it. He's one of my favorite players and I am sad to see him go to the Yankees but anybody disapointed in this deal is going to jizz themselves when Granderson hits over .300 with 115 RBIs, 25 SB and 35 HRs. The guy is a future MVP.

 

Are you kidding? Wang was pitching well in spring training and looked fine pitching the exhibition game against the Cubs. He imploded plain and simple, and may never regain his form.

I would be willing to bring him back and have him pitch in the minors for another season, but he's clearly done.

And I'm not sure how you can call another Jets fan a "fair weather fan".