Comments on: Halladay Still Yanks Best Option

By: Frank Russo

Frank Russo — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 03:25:30 +0000

Viper,

I agree. Minnesota was asking way too much then. No way would I have given up both Hughes and Wang in the same eal. Hughes going to the bullpen helped save the Yankees season in my book.

BTW…you mean Jeff Marquez, not Marquis.

By: Viper

Viper — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 03:19:21 +0000

The point was that not making the Santana move allowed Cashman to keep Hughes, Melky, and Marquis (who was later traded for Swisher) and led to the signing of Sabathia a year later.

By: Frank Russo

Frank Russo — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 03:02:03 +0000

Viper,

I didn’t bring up Santana, you did. I actually agree that Cashman did the right thing by turning down Minnesota since they wanted Hughes, Melky and and Wang in that deal, which was way too much.

I’m not going to be careful about what I say about Cashman in regards to prospects, since everyone knows he is overly infatuated with them. I would do whatever it takes to get Halladay in pinstripes, even if it means trading Joba to get him. You can disagree all you want, but that;s my opinion, and the opinion of many Yankees fans.

By: Lou

Lou — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 02:58:34 +0000

There is no way the Yankees are going to start with an offer of Joba plus Montero. Thats insane. For what? To save $7M on a pitchers contract. Think about it, that is all the Yankees are doing. Would the Yanks sell Joba and Montero for $7M? (I am assuming that Halladay is a $23M a year pitcher being paid $16M – hence in a trade he would be worth $7M). This is looking to be a lot like the Santana sweepstakes. Right now Halladay, Lee, Webb, and Beckett are all set to be free agents next year if the Yankees want another ace they will pay with cash, not cash and prospects. If the Yankees end up with Halladay it will be because they waited the Jays out and there was nothing there. Maybe a package of A-Jax, Bleich, Betances, Reliever (say Melancon), and an infielder (Russo, Pena, Corona).

By: cowboyank

cowboyank — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 00:00:31 +0000

“Sabathia AND Hughes (among others who were expected to be in that deal) > Santana”

Actually, I agree with your premise, but, Sabathia WAS NOT on the team two years ago. LOL.

By: Viper

Viper — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 22:16:46 +0000

Cashman’s “love affair” with prospects enabled him to make the best non-move of his career in regards to the Santana sweepstakes two years ago.

This team is FAR better off because he didn’t make that move. That is indisputable.

Sabathia AND Hughes (among others who were expected to be in that deal) > Santana

So you may want to think about what you’re saying before you rip Cashman for his tendency to hold onto his young talents and keep them for himself.

This team won their 27th ring in large part because he didn’t make that deal.