Yankees Say their offer for Santana is the best?

[patsfanofNC12]

They are claiming that their offer for Santana is better than any other offer. Are they high or something? Their offer could never beat the sox offers.

 

[Real World]

They are claiming that their offer for Santana is better than any other offer. Are they high or something? Their offer could never beat the sox offers.

Their offer is better as long as it involves Hughes. Phil Hughes is the best player offered in any deal. He is/was, depending on how you look at it, the best pitching prospect in baseball. Lester doesn't compare to Hughes.

 

[TomBrady'sGoat]

Is there a source for this? It's just nice to see what exactly is said.

Something important to remember when comparing the deals is that Boston is offering a middle infielder who can start for Minnesota cheaply for the next 6 years. Everyone seems to be ignoring that. Lowrie is in the top 5 prospects of a top 5 system and he's treated like a chump. He's even ready to play next year.

Their offer is better as long as it involves Hughes. Phil Hughes is the best player offered in any deal. He is/was, depending on how you look at it, the best pitching prospect in baseball. Lester doesn't compare to Hughes.

That's debatable. There were reports that the Twins valued Ellsbury more than Hughes. They have pitching prospects and a big hole in center. They also might value the fact that position players are much more reliable than pitching prospects. Hughes (and any pitching prospect including Buchholz and Chamberlain) could get hurt and their flameout rate is much higher than that of position players.

 

[Real World]

Is there a source for this? It's just nice to see what exactly is said.

Something important to remember when comparing the deals is that Boston is offering a middle infielder who can start for Minnesota cheaply for the next 6 years. Everyone seems to be ignoring that. Lowrie is in the top 5 prospects of a top 5 system and he's treated like a chump. He's even ready to play next year.



That's debatable. There were reports that the Twins valued Ellsbury more than Hughes. They have pitching prospects and a big hole in center. They also might value the fact that position players are much more reliable than pitching prospects. Hughes (and any pitching prospect including Buchholz and Chamberlain) could get hurt and their flameout rate is much higher than that of position players.

Lowrie is overrated. He's a mediocre fielder who can't play short, and doesn't have enough pop for 3rd. He won't play anywhere but 2nd base, which is the least important position on the field.

If the Sox deal was better than the Yankees deal, then why haven't the Twins pulled the trigger? They haven't because it's not really that good a deal. The Twins got greedy when the Yankees decided to include Hughes, and demanded Kennedy also, and that's when the Yanks wisely said no. Now the Twins are willing to take Marquez instead of IPK, but the Yanks have reconsidered dealing Hughes. All of this is a matter of opinion of course.

 

[TomBrady'sGoat]

Lowrie is overrated. He's a mediocre fielder who can't play short, and doesn't have enough pop for 3rd. He won't play anywhere but 2nd base, which is the least important position on the field.

If the Sox deal was better than the Yankees deal, then why haven't the Twins pulled the trigger? They haven't because it's not really that good a deal. The Twins got greedy when the Yankees decided to include Hughes, and demanded Kennedy also, and that's when the Yanks wisely said no. Now the Twins are willing to take Marquez instead of IPK, but the Yanks have reconsidered dealing Hughes. All of this is a matter of opinion of course.

I didn't realize we had a Jed Lowrie expert on Patsfans. Even if he's just a 2B there's no reason to say he's mediocre there, or to say that 2B suddenly doesn't matter. And his defense has obviously improved because last year no one said he could play SS in the pros, while now some people say he could be adequate there.

He isn't toolsy, but didn't Pedroia teach us anything? Sometimes good pitch selection, a .300 average, and doubles power is enough. He OPSed .911 and .862 in portland and pawtucket last year, his first year above A ball. That's great from a middle infielder.

And if Lowrie is so bad why don't the Yankees have a single guy like him to offer Minnesota?

I'm not saying Boston's offer should be accepted immediatey, though I will say that the fact it hasn't been accepted doesn't mean NY's is better. That makes no sense. Why hasn't NY's been accepted then? Minnesota isn't happy with either offer, and we have no real idea which one they like more.

 

[rbreg7]

Lowrie is touted the same way Pedroia was coming out of the minor leagues, IMO. I think this is all smoke coming from the Yankees, and I don't really see them landing Santana. Then again, I don't see the Red Sox pulling the trigger either. Maybe he'll end up on the Mets? I think I would be alright with that.

 

[Real World]

I didn't realize we had a Jed Lowrie expert on Patsfans. Even if he's just a 2B there's no reason to say he's mediocre there, or to say that 2B suddenly doesn't matter. And his defense has obviously improved because last year no one said he could play SS in the pros, while now some people say he could be adequate there.

He isn't toolsy, but didn't Pedroia teach us anything? Sometimes good pitch selection, a .300 average, and doubles power is enough. He OPSed .911 and .862 in portland and pawtucket last year, his first year above A ball. That's great from a middle infielder.

And if Lowrie is so bad why don't the Yankees have a single guy like him to offer Minnesota?

I'm not saying Boston's offer should be accepted immediatey, though I will say that the fact it hasn't been accepted doesn't mean NY's is better. That makes no sense. Why hasn't NY's been accepted then? Minnesota isn't happy with either offer, and we have no real idea which one they like more.

So the fact that the Yankees don't have a middle infield prospect about AA means that Lowrie is good? I see though, my opinion of Lowrie is sarcastically criticized with an "expert" comment, but everyone else's isn't. If you read all the scouting reports about prospects, and not just the one's from your favorite teams brown nosing sites, you'll get a much more realistic view of a prospects potential. I do it all the time with Yankees prospects, or with any names that are mentioned in a Yankees trade. It's about being objective. Fans tend to massively overrate the value of their teams prospects, while diminishing the value of everyone else's. I try not to do that. If I listen to the yahoo's in the Yankees forums I post in, I'd think some A ball guy who throws 87 mph, or some 26 year old tearing up the GCL, is going to be a HOF. Think of all the "can't miss untouchables" you've read about over the years, and how many have actually panned out. Not many. Lowrie might be fantastic, but from what I've read, he'll be an average2B in the majors, and won't have much pop.


If Lowrie & Co. are so good why haven't the Twins accepted the Sox offer? The bottom line is that the Twins want as much as they can get, and so far the only team that has moved on their original deal is the Yankees. They were reluctant to include Hughes from the go, and then caved. When the Yankees blinked, the Twins felt they could squeeze more, and asked for Kennedy too. That prompted the Yankees to pull back Hughes. So the best player offered the Twins for Santana was on, and is now off the table, and the Twins haven't made a deal with the Sox inspite of that, why? Clearly that is because the Yankees deal with Hughes is better than what the Sox are offering. It's not complicated. The fact that the Twins went back to the Yankees and told them they were willing to accept Jeff Marquez instead of Kennedy, reinforces that. They view Hughes, and the Yanks offer, as better than what the Sox are offering.

 

[BelichickFan]

Of the offers I've read about, the Red Sox' offer is crap. The Sox have a great deal to offer if they went the Ellsbury/Bucholtz route but all this Lester, Lowrie stuff is crap IMO.

 

[Foley]

If you read all the scouting reports about prospects, and not just the one's from your favorite teams brown nosing sites, you'll get a much more realistic view of a prospects potential. I do it all the time with Yankees prospects, or with any names that are mentioned in a Yankees trade. It's about being objective. Fans tend to massively overrate the value of their teams prospects, while diminishing the value of everyone else's. I try not to do that.

And have you read recent scouting reports on Lowrie? Or are you just going on year old information? Because most reports published during or after this season says that he has vastly improved his defense over the past year and can play SS just fine.

“He can play shortstop for me,” a scout from a National League club said. “I said that last year too. He shows range to both sides, and arm strength and athleticism to throw people out from deep in the hole. I just had questions about the bat, but that’s not really an issue anymore.”

Baseball America

The 23-year-old Lowrie, a supplemental first-round pick in 2005, also flashed an above-average arm and solid range, suggesting the inevitable move to second or third base may not be so inevitable after all.

Baseball America

He's also proven to be pretty solid at shortstop, though second base still figures to be his long-term home in the majors.

Rotoworld

Lowrie is an on-base machine. His approach is highly advanced, as he works the count well, and recognizes which pitches he can drive into the gap. His makeup is off the charts--he’s a baseball grinder who plays and practices with an infectious all-out style. Defensively, he’s fundamentally sound and features a solid, accurate arm.

Baseball prospectus

And even though his .896OPS would have been good for best in the AL for a middle infielder last season, I'll gladly post several scouting reports about his offense if you'd like.

So the best player offered the Twins for Santana was on, and is now off the table, and the Twins haven't made a deal with the Sox inspite of that, why? Clearly that is because the Yankees deal with Hughes is better than what the Sox are offering. It's not complicated. The fact that the Twins went back to the Yankees and told them they were willing to accept Jeff Marquez instead of Kennedy, reinforces that. They view Hughes, and the Yanks offer, as better than what the Sox are offering.

So the reports that Minnesota prefers Ellsbury to Hughes are just wrong then? Logically it makes sense that they'd prefer Hughes to Ellsbury, but there are reports of the contrary (here) and none that implicitly state they prefer Hughes. You can reject the information you don't like and embrace the information that you agree with, but the fact is that neither you or I know what they prefer, and saying that they definitely prefer package X over package Y is silly.

 

[groundgame]

Of the offers I've read about, the Red Sox' offer is crap. The Sox have a great deal to offer if they went the Ellsbury/Bucholtz route but all this Lester, Lowrie stuff is crap IMO.

How many talented 24 year old lefthanders are there in the majors today who have calmly and cooly, started and won a World Series clinching game? Answer: 1 (Jon Lester). So when the Sox offer a deal which includes Crisp, Lester, Lowrie plus another, it is not crap.

 

[TomBrady'sGoat]

Foley, thank you. You defended me much better than I could.

 

[Real World]

And have you read recent scouting reports on Lowrie? Or are you just going on year old information? Because most reports published during or after this season says that he has vastly improved his defense over the past year and can play SS just fine.Baseball AmericaBaseball AmericaRotoworldBaseball prospectus

And even though his .896OPS would have been good for best in the AL for a middle infielder last season, I'll gladly post several scouting reports about his offense if you'd like.So the reports that Minnesota prefers Ellsbury to Hughes are just wrong then? Logically it makes sense that they'd prefer Hughes to Ellsbury, but there are reports of the contrary (here) and none that implicitly state they prefer Hughes. You can reject the information you don't like and embrace the information that you agree with, but the fact is that neither you or I know what they prefer, and saying that they definitely prefer package X over package Y is silly.

All of this is opinion. I thought that was obvious. I'm merely stating my opinion, which is the opinion of many. The Sox offers have not changed. The lists are the same, and are readily available to the Twins as soon as they say yes. So,If they preffer Ellsbury, then why haven't they accepted the Ellsbury list? Cuz it's not that good, that's why. I know how wonderful Ellsbury did here, but he's not as valuable a player as Hughes. Ellsbury isn't a 5 tool guy, and Hughes is/was the best pitching prospect in all of baseball.

 

[Foley]

All of this is opinion. I thought that was obvious. I'm merely stating my opinion, which is the opinion of many. The Sox offers have not changed. The lists are the same, and are readily available to the Twins as soon as they say yes. So,If they preffer Ellsbury, then why haven't they accepted the Ellsbury list? Cuz it's not that good, that's why. I know how wonderful Ellsbury did here, but he's not as valuable a player as Hughes. Ellsbury isn't a 5 tool guy, and Hughes is/was the best pitching prospect in all of baseball.

Your opinion is based on the assumption that the Twins prefer Hughes to Ellsbury, which is something that is reportedly not the case. So until I see otherwise, I'm going to believe reports that say the Twins prefer Ellsbury as opposed to the assumption that they should prefer Hughes.

They haven't accepted the Ellsbury offer because they still want more. Just as they didn't accept the Hughes offer because they wanted more. And if Hughes is off the table like you suggest then why is there a question about which offer is better? Either the Yankees are offering Hughes, or the Red Sox offer is clearly superior.

 

[TomBrady'sGoat]

All of this is opinion. I thought that was obvious. I'm merely stating my opinion, which is the opinion of many. The Sox offers have not changed. The lists are the same, and are readily available to the Twins as soon as they say yes. So,If they preffer Ellsbury, then why haven't they accepted the Ellsbury list? Cuz it's not that good, that's why. I know how wonderful Ellsbury did here, but he's not as valuable a player as Hughes. Ellsbury isn't a 5 tool guy, and Hughes is/was the best pitching prospect in all of baseball.

Since we're giving opinion full validity here, Hughes never was the best pitching prospect in baseball. Homer Bailey was a better prospect at this time last year. It is also worth noting that Hughes had a disappointing year and his status as a prospect last year means nothing.

Do you not understand that the Twins simply want more? They may eventually settle for one of the Boston or NY offers, but they first want to give everyone a chance to top them. They want more from the Sox and they want more from the Yankees. How this proves the Yankees offer is better is beyond me.

And your opinion on Lowrie isn't valid if it is poorly informed and biased (and I don't care how many Yankees fans agree). Foley could actually back up the fact that Lowrie's defense has improved and that his offense has been superb in the minors.

And a last thought, Derek Jeter isn't a 5 tool player either. Does it really matter that Ellsbury lacks power and an arm?

 

[Real World]

Since we're giving opinion full validity here, Hughes never was the best pitching prospect in baseball. Homer Bailey was a better prospect at this time last year. It is also worth noting that Hughes had a disappointing year and his status as a prospect last year means nothing.

Homer Bailey may have been at some point, but Hughes was at the end of last year. Never the less, let's say he was #2, was Ellsbury ever #2, or close to it? I don't think so. Hughes' disappointing year, if you call it that (check out his final or so starts) was largely due to the fact that he tore his hamstring, and then suffered a severe anke sprain. He was never healthy until near the end. That's why his command was off, as was his velocity.

Do you not understand that the Twins simply want more? They may eventually settle for one of the Boston or NY offers, but they first want to give everyone a chance to top them. They want more from the Sox and they want more from the Yankees. How this proves the Yankees offer is better is beyond me.

I absoultely understand that the Twins want more. Here's what you can't seem to grasp though, the Twins asked for Hughes, the Yanks blinked and insterted him, they then said Hughes & Kennedy, the Yanks said no, and that Hughes was then off the table, where which the Twins came back and said give us Marquez instead of Kennedy and we have a deal. The Yanks refused, as the Twins greediness gave them pause about Hughes' availability. It's not all that complicated to understand.

And your opinion on Lowrie isn't valid if it is poorly informed and biased (and I don't care how many Yankees fans agree). Foley could actually back up the fact that Lowrie's defense has improved and that his offense has been superb in the minors.

And a last thought, Derek Jeter isn't a 5 tool player either. Does it really matter that Ellsbury lacks power and an arm?

Whatever you say bud. I read all the same reports and pages that everybody else does. Do an internet chat with some of the regular pundits and see what they say about different prospects and players. All of them have different views. From all that I've read, Lowrie, while a very nice prospect, isn't the type of player that pushes you to make a deal a guy for an ace like Johan Santana. If he's Pedroia defensively, he isn't sniffing SS in the majors. 2B is the least important position on the field. I'm not saying Lowrie stinks, I'm merely saying he isn't as desirable a prospect as people around here are led to believe. Yankees fans do the same thing with some of their prospects. They always think they're better than they actually are.

Jeter is one of the best SS in all of baseball & a HOF. You're trying to compare a SS to an OF. Ellsbury could be a better Coco Crisp for all we know, or maybe he could be Johnny Damon. Either way, you take a prospect like Hughes over an Ellsbury. Pitching wins, and in today's league, it's the single most valuable resource with respect to availability and cost. When guys like Silva are getting close to $50 million over 4 years, 5 years of Hughes is incredibly valuable.

 

[TomBrady'sGoat]

Homer Bailey may have been at some point, but Hughes was at the end of last year. Never the less, let's say he was #2, was Ellsbury ever #2, or close to it? I don't think so. Hughes' disappointing year, if you call it that (check out his final or so starts) was largely due to the fact that he tore his hamstring, and then suffered a severe anke sprain. He was never healthy until near the end. That's why his command was off, as was his velocity.

Huh? Bailey's value was at its highest at the end of 2006 / beginning of 2007, just like Hughes. They were considered the consensus top 2 pitching prospects.

I understand why Hughes's 2007 was disappointing, and the fact he suffered leg injuries (rather than arm/shoulder ones) makes it not much of a concern. You cannot deny that it was a disappointing, lost season though.

And no, Ellsbury has never been a top positional prospect. Of course, many people will take a positional prospect (especially at a position of need) over a pitching prospect because of likelihood of panning out. Give me five pitching prospects and I can feel good that two might pan out. Give me one (with an arm injury in his past, no less) and I might not feel so good about it.

I absoultely understand that the Twins want more. Here's what you can't seem to grasp though, the Twins asked for Hughes, the Yanks blinked and insterted him, they then said Hughes & Kennedy, the Yanks said no, and that Hughes was then off the table, where which the Twins came back and said give us Marquez instead of Kennedy and we have a deal. The Yanks refused, as the Twins greediness gave them pause about Hughes' availability. It's not all that complicated to understand.

First off, we don't really know anything. We think we know from reports but there is misinformation out there (along with front offices changing their mind during the process). The only people who know if Hughes is even on the table anymore are in the NY and Minnesota front offices.

What about Minnesota demanding Ellsbury and Boston eventually offering him? How is that different from the Yankees giving in on Hughes? Rumors from Red Sox land were that Minnesota then demanded Ryan Kalish on top of Ellsbury. It seems like Minnesota simply wants more from either team.

Whatever you say bud. I read all the same reports and pages that everybody else does. Do an internet chat with some of the regular pundits and see what they say about different prospects and players. All of them have different views. From all that I've read, Lowrie, while a very nice prospect, isn't the type of player that pushes you to make a deal a guy for an ace like Johan Santana. If he's Pedroia defensively, he isn't sniffing SS in the majors. 2B is the least important position on the field. I'm not saying Lowrie stinks, I'm merely saying he isn't as desirable a prospect as people around here are led to believe. Yankees fans do the same thing with some of their prospects. They always think they're better than they actually are.

Jeter is one of the best SS in all of baseball & a HOF. You're trying to compare a SS to an OF. Ellsbury could be a better Coco Crisp for all we know, or maybe he could be Johnny Damon. Either way, you take a prospect like Hughes over an Ellsbury. Pitching wins, and in today's league, it's the single most valuable resource with respect to availability and cost. When guys like Silva are getting close to $50 million over 4 years, 5 years of Hughes is incredibly valuable.

I never said Lowrie was a stud prospect. What I said was that he was being ignored as an aspect of Boston's offer. I said that the reports were that his defense had improved, and I pointed out his minor league OPS. I said that he can likely be a cheap starter for Minnesota for 6 years. Where am I exaggerating? Where I am being a homer drinking the kool-aid? You're the only one here making biased statements about him, yet you accuse me of getting carried away.

I wasn't comparing Ellsbury to Jeter, and I think it was pretty obvious. I was pointing out that the Yankees have an active Hall of Famer (and everyone's favorite ballplayer) who isn't a 5 tool player. The fact you use it against any other player is silly. The 5-tool designation is a crappy measuring stick.

Yes, if Hughes excels he's more valuable over the next 5 years than anyone the Sox are willing to offer. You can't ignore the attrition rate of pitchers, and that makes this a debate even if you don't want it to be.

 

[Real World]

Your opinion is based on the assumption that the Twins prefer Hughes to Ellsbury, which is something that is reportedly not the case. So until I see otherwise, I'm going to believe reports that say the Twins prefer Ellsbury as opposed to the assumption that they should prefer Hughes.

They haven't accepted the Ellsbury offer because they still want more. Just as they didn't accept the Hughes offer because they wanted more. And if Hughes is off the table like you suggest then why is there a question about which offer is better? Either the Yankees are offering Hughes, or the Red Sox offer is clearly superior.

Oh no, my opinion isn't based on who they want more, it's based on what package is better. The Twins may indeed want Ellsbury more, but their actions clearly show that Hughes has more value. Again, this isn't complicated. Hughes is the best player mentioned in any deal, and the Twins know that. They might want Ellsbury, but he, and the rest of the list that comes with him, isn't as good as the Hughes package. That's why the Twins recinded their Kennedy demands with the Hughes list, because it's that much better overall. This is what I mean by local fans overrating their own prospects and players. Ellsbury is good, but he's not Hughes good. For the Twins, they're not going to take a deal they view poorly because of one player they "like". It's the overall package quality & value that matter.

 

[Real World]

Huh? Bailey's value was at its highest at the end of 2006 / beginning of 2007, just like Hughes. They were considered the consensus top 2 pitching prospects.

I understand why Hughes's 2007 was disappointing, and the fact he suffered leg injuries (rather than arm/shoulder ones) makes it not much of a concern. You cannot deny that it was a disappointing, lost season though.

And no, Ellsbury has never been a top positional prospect. Of course, many people will take a positional prospect (especially at a position of need) over a pitching prospect because of likelihood of panning out. Give me five pitching prospects and I can feel good that two might pan out. Give me one (with an arm injury in his past, no less) and I might not feel so good about it.



First off, we don't really know anything. We think we know from reports but there is misinformation out there (along with front offices changing their mind during the process). The only people who know if Hughes is even on the table anymore are in the NY and Minnesota front offices.

What about Minnesota demanding Ellsbury and Boston eventually offering him? How is that different from the Yankees giving in on Hughes? Rumors from Red Sox land were that Minnesota then demanded Ryan Kalish on top of Ellsbury. It seems like Minnesota simply wants more from either team.



I never said Lowrie was a stud prospect. What I said was that he was being ignored as an aspect of Boston's offer. I said that the reports were that his defense had improved, and I pointed out his minor league OPS. I said that he can likely be a cheap starter for Minnesota for 6 years. Where am I exaggerating? Where I am being a homer drinking the kool-aid? You're the only one here making biased statements about him, yet you accuse me of getting carried away.

I wasn't comparing Ellsbury to Jeter, and I think it was pretty obvious. I was pointing out that the Yankees have an active Hall of Famer (and everyone's favorite ballplayer) who isn't a 5 tool player. The fact you use it against any other player is silly. The 5-tool designation is a crappy measuring stick.

Yes, if Hughes excels he's more valuable over the next 5 years than anyone the Sox are willing to offer. You can't ignore the attrition rate of pitchers, and that makes this a debate even if you don't want it to be.

I'm not sure how 13 major league starts & a playoff appearance are a lost season. Had he missed the season, then sure, but he got enough time in to get a good understanding of what the pros is about.

I use the 5 tool reference because Ellsbury is an OF prospect who's missing 2 of the tools. Again, Ellsbury could/should become a very good player, maybe an excellent player, but there is little drop off from Melky to Ellsbury, which is in contrast to anything else mentioned on his list, versus Hughes.

 

[TomBrady'sGoat]

I'm not sure how 13 major league starts & a playoff appearance are a lost season. Had he missed the season, then sure, but he got enough time in to get a good understanding of what the pros is about.

A great pitching prospect, coming off of a great season, had a so-so year and suffered injuries. He only threw 73 innings, so he'll have the same innings limit next year. I don't see how 2007 can be chalked up as anything but a disappointment for Hughes. His 2006 was out-of-this-world, and his 2007 doesn't mean he can't have a great 2008. I just don't see why you can't admit his 2007 was a bad year.

If it helps, I'll admit that Coco somehow got even worse defensively and that Daniel Bard looks like he'll never pitch in the majors. It's ok, not everything needs to be spun as sunshine and roses.

I use the 5 tool reference because Ellsbury is an OF prospect who's missing 2 of the tools. Again, Ellsbury could/should become a very good player, maybe an excellent player, but there is little drop off from Melky to Ellsbury, which is in contrast to anything else mentioned on his list, versus Hughes.

But he has a great eye/approach/patience/whatever, a tool ignored by the 5-tool method (yet more important than most of them). And one of his tools (speed) is exceptional. If you aren't going to good at everything it really helps to be great at one thing. Ellsbury's speed qualifies.

Melky is a 4th outfielder forced to start because of injuries and no better options. His OPS last year was .718. His offense was as bad as Coco Crisp's, who at least had stellar defense to fall back on (and I think Crisp is an awful player, at least on the Sox). Ellsbury should only be mentioned in the same sentence as Melky if the words "is much better than" are in there.

Sheesh, talk about buying into your team's/fan base's hype.

 

[Foley]

Oh no, my opinion isn't based on who they want more, it's based on what package is better. The Twins may indeed want Ellsbury more, but their actions clearly show that Hughes has more value. Again, this isn't complicated. Hughes is the best player mentioned in any deal, and the Twins know that. They might want Ellsbury, but he, and the rest of the list that comes with him, isn't as good as the Hughes package. That's why the Twins recinded their Kennedy demands with the Hughes list, because it's that much better overall. This is what I mean by local fans overrating their own prospects and players. Ellsbury is good, but he's not Hughes good. For the Twins, they're not going to take a deal they view poorly because of one player they "like". It's the overall package quality & value that matter.

Well if you want to take overall quality that still doesn't give NYY an obvious advantage. John Sickels, an authority on milb prospects, ranks Ellsbury an A-, Lowrie an A-, and Masterson a B. Only Marquez is ranked for NYY (as he is the only minor leaguer in their offer) and is ranked a C+. So assuming Hughes is an A (his ranking last year) and Cabrera a B, the two packages consist of A-, A-, B and A, B, C+. That doesn't look like one offer is clearly better than the other in terms of overall quality. Even if you deem Cabrera as only a "little drop off" from Ellsbury and give him a B+, the packages are still pretty even.

Baseball Prospectus ranks Ellsbury a 5 star player, and Lowrie and Masterson 4 star players. Marquez isn't on the list of top 11 NYY prospects, but the list ends with 2 star prospects so I'll give him that. If Hughes is a 5-star and Cabrera a 4-star (a stretch), then they would deem Bostons offer superior to NYYs (5,4,4 > 5,4,2).

I know you disagree, but one of the most respected milb talent evaluators and one of the most respected baseball analysis sites says that the two packages are very comparable.