Doesn't Re-Signing Mike Lowell hurt the Yankees?

[JoeSixPat]

I just hate it when anyone brings up 1st base and the players name is not Youk. What does this guy have to do to make believers out of them. Zero errors at first base. How long before this guy starts bringing home the gold gloves? What batter did the Cleveland staff not want to pitch to. Even when they got him out, he fouled off so many balls he demoralized them. If the Sox can't re-sign Lowe, then trade for a third baseman.

I don't think anyone's dissing Youk... in fact just the opposite, with the thought he's got a lot of years ahead of him and could be the third basemen to replace Lowell if his health fails

I think also one looks to first base and sees that its a position that someone with limited mobility like Papi can handle well (no errors for him this year at First either) and they see it as a potential landing spot for someone like Papi, freeing a space for a DH.

 

[scout]

I don't think anyone's dissing Youk... in fact just the opposite, with the thought he's got a lot of years ahead of him and could be the third basemen to replace Lowell if his health fails

I think also one looks to first base and sees that its a position that someone with limited mobility like Papi can handle well (no errors for him this year at First either) and they see it as a potential landing spot for someone like Papi, freeing a space for a DH.

As intriguing it would be to have the three outfielders (Jacoby, Cocoa, JD) as someone mentioned, it would be a mistake to have Papi at first. Papi's not a liability like Giambi, but at the same time, he's probably at that end of the spectrum. A great first baseman can give you a lot of wins and its usually where a team puts a liability (see Giambi).

 

[JoeSixPat]

Youk is far better at first. I like Lowell, but I will UNDERSTAND if Red Sox will not sign him for more than 4+ years at 15 mill a year. On the other hand, I will not tolerate a 10 years on AROD, come on, he will be at 41 at 3B? Also, 30 mill is way too much.
Trade Crisp for reliever, put Moss as an optional bench on 1st basemen/OF since we lost Hinske to FA.

I'm not sure what Crisp will fetch straight up for a reliever - teams aren't exactly in the practice of giving up quality pitchers for outfielders who lack power and bat .270

There's a rumor however that Crisp, Lester and Buchholtz would be packaged for Johan Santana... a lot to give up but a lot to get as Santana's been nothing but consistent

That could be a helluva 1,2 3 lineup (Santana would need to be extended first)

Beckett
Santana
Dice-K (hopefully like Beckett does better his 2nd season)

I think I'd pull the trigger on that

 

[Foley]

So Edgar Renteria was playing well when the Red Sox traded him?

Renteria in 2005 had comperable stats to Damon in 2007, which you think are pretty good. More runs, more RBI, higher BA, the OPS is about the same. Not as good as they wanted him to play, but not terrible. Plus, Renteria was 31. Its a lot easier to trade away an underperforming player in their early 30s than one in their late 30s.

So wait - Damon's a problem because he can't start - nor do you apparently want him to... but you're complaining that Damon can't start?

Oh wait - now I remember - Damon is preventing Melky Cabrera from playing -so how many more games do you think they can get Melky in for, given the fact that he played in 150 games last year and had 545 at bats... (and about the same stats as Damon)

Damon is a problem because hes an injury risk, and there is a better, cheaper option than him already on the team. He is unnecessary, and his spot on the roster could be filled with a more useful player. If it wasn't for Damon they would be able to sign or trade for a better 1B or DH, but his existence on the roster makes that impossible. No one will trade for him, not only because hes underperforming, 35, and is a terrible bat for a corner OF position, but also because this is a great FA class for OFs.

And I didn't claim Cabrera was losing playing time or was in jeopardy of losing his job. I said that for next year the options was to either send him to the minors (which I incorrectly assumed would be understood as a very unlikely scenario), or the more likely scenario that has played out since 2006. I'll be sure to spell things out for you next time.

If the Sox are interested in either Lowell or A-Rod, its a no brainer that Lowell is the "lesser of two evils" of overpaying. I could deal with them taking neither and being somewhat weat defensively in the corner, as well as the offensive loss of production - but that also means the Yankees get stronger by signing Lowell - and I don't like that.

I can deal with them taking neither too and thats what they should do. If there are other options available, and there are, than there is no reason to overpay for someone. If Lowell wants the Sox to pay him into his late 30s, then they should wish him luck and say goodbye.

And as far as making the Yankees stronger... they'd get someone to play 3B regardless of where Lowell goes. They wouldn't enter 2008 with some fill in at 3B, they'd go and get someone else via trade (or sign Mike Lamb who has nearly identical career stats to Lowell). They've already expressed interest in Miguel Cabrera, and I'd much rather them sign Lowell than trade for Cabrera. That and Lowell is mediocre outside of Fenway so he wouldn't be half the player he was in Boston.

 

[Foley]

As intriguing it would be to have the three outfielders (Jacoby, Cocoa, JD) as someone mentioned, it would be a mistake to have Papi at first. Papi's not a liability like Giambi, but at the same time, he's probably at that end of the spectrum. A great first baseman can give you a lot of wins and its usually where a team puts a liability (see Giambi).

Defensive ability aside, I think the major reason that they have Ortiz at DH is because he had wrist problems when he played 1B in Minnesota, so obviously Ortiz staying healthy is more important than anything else. Ortiz is a better 1B than Manny is a LF, so if all else was equal I think they'd rather have Ortiz in the field.

 

[skspikex2]

I'm not sure what Crisp will fetch straight up for a reliever - teams aren't exactly in the practice of giving up quality pitchers for outfielders who lack power and bat .270

There's a rumor however that Crisp, Lester and Buchholtz would be packaged for Johan Santana... a lot to give up but a lot to get as Santana's been nothing but consistent

That could be a helluva 1,2 3 lineup (Santana would need to be extended first)

Beckett
Santana
Dice-K (hopefully like Beckett does better his 2nd season)

I think I'd pull the trigger on that

Suprisingly there're teams who desperately need a gold glove CF with speed and okie hitting. As for Johan, no. Lester and Buch are young and hella cheap, they capable of winning 10-12 games a year each. Johan is a FA after 2008, he will command a 15+ mill a year. Why trade 2 of our young starting pitchers for a guy who can be for a season?

 

[patriotspride]

Suprisingly there're teams who desperately need a gold glove CF with speed and okie hitting. As for Johan, no. Lester and Buch are young and hella cheap, they capable of winning 10-12 games a year each. Johan is a FA after 2008, he will command a 15+ mill a year. Why trade 2 of our young starting pitchers for a guy who can be for a season?

if they can get a window to work out a new deal with santana as part of the trade then i say do it .but if the twins wont agree to a window then im with you dont do it .

 

[TomBrady'sGoat]

Lots of stuff to hit on:

There is no good reason to believe Lowell will have another year like this one. This year was likely an aberration, and his second half slide was avoided in part due to a high babip (don't know where to look this up, but pretty sure it was like .380 in the second half). If I knew I could get 2007 Lowell for two more years and then a slight drop-off after that I'd sign him for four years in a heartbeat. Much more likely is for him to OPS+ 110 each of the next two years and 100 the two after that. No thanks.

Re: 1B and Youk. I want 30+ home runs at first. 1B is the easiest fielding position to hide a slugger. I'd rather get Manny's production from 1B and get better defense in LF. Power hitters aren't easy to come by so I don't mind Youk at 1B, but if Boston gets an opportunity to pick one up I don't want Youk at 1B preventing it.

The hitter Damon is right now would be ok in CF. He's an awful hitter for a corner outfielder. With Melky in CF the Yankees have little use for him. 13M is expensive for a 4th outfielder.

Coco actually should have some trade value. He's affordable for the next two years and even has a club option at 8M after that. His CF defense is very valuable, and he could be a much better hitter in the NL where conventional wisdom says he'll see more fastballs (is this true?) and a team will let him hack away. He could be a poor man's Juan Pierre, who is an awful ballplayer yet for some reason valued by NL teams.

Renteria v Damon is a bad comparison. 2005 Renteria had an aberration year and there was reason to believe he'd perform again outside of Boston. 2007 Damon was showing signs of age.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Suprisingly there're teams who desperately need a gold glove CF with speed and okie hitting. As for Johan, no. Lester and Buch are young and hella cheap, they capable of winning 10-12 games a year each. Johan is a FA after 2008, he will command a 15+ mill a year. Why trade 2 of our young starting pitchers for a guy who can be for a season?

As I said no one in their right mind would trade those guys for a one year rental... he'd need to be extended to a new contract, which is what is being talked about.

And as we all know, pitching a no hitter is not a barometer of long term pitching success - look at the list of folks who have them - some good pitchers there - some not so good who got lucky.

I won't mind in the least if they keep Buchholtz and Lester - but giving up two potentials for one sure fire premier pitcher is not a bad move on the Sox part.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Renteria in 2005 had comperable stats to Damon in 2007, which you think are pretty good. More runs, more RBI, higher BA, the OPS is about the same. Not as good as they wanted him to play, but not terrible. Plus, Renteria was 31. Its a lot easier to trade away an underperforming player in their early 30s than one in their late 30s.

For some odd reason I had it in my head that Renteria was traded away because he had a lot of errors in the field - and he was brought here, not to be a strong bat, but to be a solid fielder.

You seem to have overlooked that small aspect - or am I remembering that wrong?

Damon is a problem because hes an injury risk, and there is a better, cheaper option than him already on the team. He is unnecessary, and his spot on the roster could be filled with a more useful player. If it wasn't for Damon they would be able to sign or trade for a better 1B or DH, but his existence on the roster makes that impossible. No one will trade for him, not only because hes underperforming, 35, and is a terrible bat for a corner OF position, but also because this is a great FA class for OFs.

I don't think we can blame Damon because a young buck has developed well in the Yankees system. And while he remains an injury risk - he's played 140 games each season for the Yankees. Is that bad?

The Yankees could move him if they were willing to pay a portion of his salary - what portion I can't say - but they could move him... but his production isn't so bad that they're inclined to do that either.

I still contend that you can pretty much move anyone if you're willing to pay their full salary - the Yankees and most teams are reluctant to do that.

And I didn't claim Cabrera was losing playing time or was in jeopardy of losing his job. I said that for next year the options was to either send him to the minors (which I incorrectly assumed would be understood as a very unlikely scenario), or the more likely scenario that has played out since 2006. I'll be sure to spell things out for you next time.

Saying that sending Cabrera to the minors is an option - unlikely or otherwise - because Damon's on the Yankees seems to miss the point that

1. Under no circumstances would the Yankees actually do that and
2. He's had plenty of playing time and at bats with Damon on the team

So I'm still not clear on how Damon is preventing Cabrera from playing.

I can deal with them taking neither too and thats what they should do. If there are other options available, and there are, than there is no reason to overpay for someone. If Lowell wants the Sox to pay him into his late 30s, then they should wish him luck and say goodbye.

And as far as making the Yankees stronger... they'd get someone to play 3B regardless of where Lowell goes. They wouldn't enter 2008 with some fill in at 3B, they'd go and get someone else via trade (or sign Mike Lamb who has nearly identical career stats to Lowell). They've already expressed interest in Miguel Cabrera, and I'd much rather them sign Lowell than trade for Cabrera. That and Lowell is mediocre outside of Fenway so he wouldn't be half the player he was in Boston.

Interesting listening to Luchino on EEI this morning - clearly there's some division in the Sox think tank - and clearly Luchino is NOT in the camp that would have A-Rod wind up with the Sox... he could even be the Red Sox "source" that stated A-Rod's negative locker room presence and poor post-season bat would hurt, not help the team... (he actually said that the Sox would "never" sign a player to such a long term costly contract as 10 years $300 million total)

What he did say was that he wouldn't rule out A-Rod going back to the Yankees - which I think is slight hyperbole seeing as that would cost the Yankees $30 million more than it would have to extend him given the subsidy from the Rangers, and the Steinbrenner family wouldn't take that slap in the face too kindly.

What he was illustrating though is the fact that he thinks the Yankees would have no other options BUT to re-sign A-Rod if the Sox can re-sign Lowell

Reading between the lines, it sounded like Luchino was relishing the thought that the Yankees might be forced to make such a move, or do without a quality third baseman... and further that A-Rod himself might find himself without an able benefactor as few teams can afford him

(my prediction is that A-Rod goes with Torrre to the Dodgers)

 

[Foley]

For some odd reason I had it in my head that Renteria was traded away because he had a lot of errors in the field - and he was brought here, not to be a strong bat, but to be a solid fielder.

You seem to have overlooked that small aspect - or am I remembering that wrong?

Lowell had a career high in errors this year too, would you expect that to continue? Lowell, like Renteria, has a long track record of being a well above average defensive player. I don't think any reasonable person expected Renteria to continue committing 30 errors a season. Especially when you factor in the fact he was playing with a back injury the entire season.

I don't think we can blame Damon because a young buck has developed well in the Yankees system. And while he remains an injury risk - he's played 140 games each season for the Yankees. Is that bad?

The Yankees could move him if they were willing to pay a portion of his salary - what portion I can't say - but they could move him... but his production isn't so bad that they're inclined to do that either.

I still contend that you can pretty much move anyone if you're willing to pay their full salary - the Yankees and most teams are reluctant to do that.

I never blamed Damon, I blamed the Yankees for making an ill-advised signing when they already had a capable CF in the minors. And again, playing 140 games is fine, but when you are signed to play CF and half your games come as a DH, thats a problem.

And I disagree with the notion that a team can trade anyone away when they start playing poorly, but even if they could do that what kind of repercussions would it set? What player would sign with a team that has a track record of shipping off players to "bad, low budget team" as soon as they start to get old and decline?

Saying that sending Cabrera to the minors is an option - unlikely or otherwise - because Damon's on the Yankees seems to miss the point that

1. Under no circumstances would the Yankees actually do that and
2. He's had plenty of playing time and at bats with Damon on the team

So I'm still not clear on how Damon is preventing Cabrera from playing.

It is an option, just as much as benching David Ortiz for three games in Colorado was an option and putting Youkilis in RF for three games was an option. Was either going to happen? Absolutely not. But it was discussed as a choice, regardless of how absurd an option it was.

And again, I never said Damon was taking playing time from Cabrera.

(my prediction is that A-Rod goes with Torrre to the Dodgers)

I hope you're right. If that happens, then Boston should try and trade for Andy Laroche and get a young, cheap, potentially phenomenal hitter to replace Lowell. That would be the perfect scenario to happen in my opinion.

 

[skspikex2]

Thank you for the point.
I'm all for it for Johan on the trade, if he agreed to a contract extension before the trade.

Not sure if anyone willing to do this, if we cant get Lowell or Arod, move Youk to 3B and get Mark Texeria(sp?) I think he's a FA after next season, but I heard he want to play in Baltimore(God knows why?)

 

[TomBrady'sGoat]

Thank you for the point.
I'm all for it for Johan on the trade, if he agreed to a contract extension before the trade.

Not sure if anyone willing to do this, if we cant get Lowell or Arod, move Youk to 3B and get Mark Texeria(sp?) I think he's a FA after next season, but I heard he want to play in Baltimore(God knows why?)

The Braves just trade Salty for Tex. I don't think they have any interest in trading him.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Lowell had a career high in errors this year too, would you expect that to continue? Lowell, like Renteria, has a long track record of being a well above average defensive player. I don't think any reasonable person expected Renteria to continue committing 30 errors a season. Especially when you factor in the fact he was playing with a back injury the entire season.

Renteria was traded because he was a horrible defensive presence. We never expected him to be a hitter - and we had to pay a good portion of his salary to unload him. That's what happend. Period.

If something similar happened in the future we could unload that player by paying a good portion of their salary too. So could the Yankees.

I never blamed Damon, I blamed the Yankees for making an ill-advised signing when they already had a capable CF in the minors. And again, playing 140 games is fine, but when you are signed to play CF and half your games come as a DH, thats a problem.

I'm sure the Yankees think its too bad you don't work for them - because Cabrera had 0 games in the major leagues in 2004 - and only 6 games in 2005. Yet at the time you knew they had a sure fire Major League Center Fielder? You need to get paid for that talent.

And I disagree with the notion that a team can trade anyone away when they start playing poorly, but even if they could do that what kind of repercussions would it set? What player would sign with a team that has a track record of shipping off players to "bad, low budget team" as soon as they start to get old and decline?
It is an option, just as much as benching David Ortiz for three games in Colorado was an option and putting Youkilis in RF for three games was an option. Was either going to happen? Absolutely not. But it was discussed as a choice, regardless of how absurd an option it was.

And again, I never said Damon was taking playing time from Cabrera.I hope you're right. If that happens, then Boston should try and trade for Andy Laroche and get a young, cheap, potentially phenomenal hitter to replace Lowell. That would be the perfect scenario to happen in my opinion.

A team can trade away whoever they want if the price is right - its just a question of whether they would.

The bottom line is, if Damon is hitting .170 and can't run on gimpy knees he's not going to be in the lineup - and might be off the team, traded with the Yanks assuming most of his contract to open up a spot for a guy who will help the team win.

At .270 with limited power but staying reasonably healthy he's in a bit of a limbo - not so bad the Yanks will give up on him, but not so good they're getting full value on his contract.

That's baseball - that's the way it works with guranteed contracts. Accept it. There's always risk.

 

[Foley]

Renteria was traded because he was a horrible defensive presence. We never expected him to be a hitter - and we had to pay a good portion of his salary to unload him. That's what happend. Period.

I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm only saying it was easy to trade Renteria because he was only 31 and prior to 2005 had a very good track record for defensive ability. His bad defensive year was nothing more than a bad year, and most saw it as such.

I'm sure the Yankees think its too bad you don't work for them - because Cabrera had 0 games in the major leagues in 2004 - and only 6 games in 2005. Yet at the time you knew they had a sure fire Major League Center Fielder? You need to get paid for that talent.

I do, actually.

His numbers in the minors were pretty good (.294BA, .769OPS). It certainly wasn't a guarantee, but it wasn't a stretch at the time to think that Cabrera would be a very capable major leaguer.

The bottom line is, if Damon is hitting .170 and can't run on gimpy knees he's not going to be in the lineup - and might be off the team, traded with the Yanks assuming most of his contract to open up a spot for a guy who will help the team win.

What team would want a 35 year old with bad knees? Especially one hitting .170 and can't play the field? If the player has no redeeming value than why would someone trade for them?

Its one thing to trade for a player to try to to get them out if a funk of hope they get healthy, but its another thing entirely to trade for a player who clearly has his best years behind him.

 

[scout]

Lots of stuff to hit on:
Re: 1B and Youk. I want 30+ home runs at first. 1B is the easiest fielding position to hide a slugger. I'd rather get Manny's production from 1B and get better defense in LF. Power hitters aren't easy to come by so I don't mind Youk at 1B, but if Boston gets an opportunity to pick one up I don't want Youk at 1B preventing it.

.

Have you ever seen Jason Giambi play first? You could probably get him really cheap, and he's a power hitter.
Why does anyone care if your first baseman hits 30+ home runs vs another infielder. We can go around and around on this, but at the end of the day, the guy I want at first is Youk. This is the one guy opposing pitchers did not want to face above all others with apologies to Lowell.

 

[JoeSixPat]

What team would want a 35 year old with bad knees? Especially one hitting .170 and can't play the field? If the player has no redeeming value than why would someone trade for them?

Its one thing to trade for a player to try to to get them out if a funk of hope they get healthy, but its another thing entirely to trade for a player who clearly has his best years behind him.

If they weren't paying his salary, and there was a chance he'd come out of his slump and be a decent DH - why wouldn't they take him?

The point is he's not going to be clogging up a space on the Yankees, because the Yankees have money and want to win.

That is THE point. Do you really think that the Yankees are going to pitch Carl Pavano (once he's healthy) instead of a young hurler with a 3.33 ERA and a 97 mph fast ball just because they spent a lot of money on him?

More than any other team, money is no object to the Yankees.

 

[Foley]

If they weren't paying his salary, and there was a chance he'd come out of his slump and be a decent DH - why wouldn't they take him?

Because slump and being in a steep decline are two different things. When a player is in their mid to late 30s and has all of those problems its usually a decline.