On Money and Teixeira

When the news came down this afternoon that the Yankees had stolen Mark Teixeira away from those poor old Red Sox (who, really, just can't seem to catch a break, poor kids) my first thought was, "How am I going to deal with the onslaught of bile coming out of the mouths of my Yankee-hating friends and colleagues?"

In truth, picking up Tex for $180 million does, on the surface, appear to solidify the Yankees' status as an embarrassment of riches. I can understand the frustration that fans of other teams are feeling. Cashman and Co. have gone on a spending spree that surprises even most Bomber fans, let alone Bomber bashers; however, in thinking about it this evening I've decided to adopt a harsh, yet sincere mantra: If you don't like it, too bad. Deal with it.

Now, believe me, I do not say this to sound obnoxious (even though it does). Nor do I say it to be antagonistic, or generally arrogant. I say it because I am tired of every fan blaming the Yankees for their team's shortcomings. I am tired of having to defend a team who, more than any other organization in sport, puts its profits back into its product. Consider that for a moment. Can you think of any business (and, yes, folks, it's a business, as entertaining and heart-wrenching as it is) that actually gets ridiculed for catering to its client and working on his behalf? Let me answer: No. No, you do not.

As ridiculous as it may sound, the Yankees are actually victimized by their desire to create a profitable and competitive product. They are victimized by the fact that they represent the "visible evil"; the team that spends an immense amount of money, calls the boring press conferences, and shows up in every sport tabloid no matter what the rumor. Their spending is tangible and apparent.

On the flipside of that coin are all of the teams whose ownership winces and whines over every dollar that they are forced to shell out to their talent. Please spare me the sob story of the "small market team" that can't afford to compete. An owner, whether he is in Kansas City or New York, is going to be a multi-millionaire with his hand in a multitude of industries, all of which have made him rich beyond compare (richer, even, than the Steinbrenners). Where is the outcry when these "small market" owners quietly refuse to do their due diligence and spend money for the benefit of their organization and their fans? Where is the complaint when these same owners pocket their cut of revenue sharing instead of investing it in the team, which was the intent of revenue sharing in the first place? Answer: You don't see it, because the actions on the part of these owners is not tangible; not apparent. Theirs is the "invisible evil," and no one gets upset about what they cannot see.

So, really, who is doing more damage to baseball? If nothing else, the Yankees are a model for how to turn a game into a legacy (of performance and profit). Dare I say it? Maybe others should be taking pointers, instead of pointing fingers.

I'll close with an analogy, and see if it makes sense (I'm not sure it does, but here goes): You have a child, and that child is fortunate enough to build a small fortune through his/her work; more money than anyone in your neighborhood. When your child, then, decides to build a giant house for himself in the middle of the neighborhood, are you going to tell the child, "You can't build that house. Nobody else in the neighborhood has a house that big, so you shouldn't either. Even though your work has enabled you to afford the house, it just wouldn't be fair to everybody else if you built it. Why don't you just buy a small house and keep that fortune hidden away."

Something tells me that wouldn't be your angle.

The Yankees have built their house. They've (literally) earned that right. Deal with it.
_

It's A Trap!

Can't help but start to think that C.C. Sabathia is leading the Yankees into very dangerous territory and has no qualms about leaving the one team to offer him endless supplies of cash with no rotation to speak of.

At first, I had no problem with C.C. taking his time. "Hey," I rationalized, " If the dude wants to pitcher here, he'll pitch here. If he doesn't, he'll sign somewhere else. He's going to set the market, so even if he bails, the Yanks will still have plenty of options."

Well, the operative part of that thought was, "He'll sign somewhere." Nearly one month after receiving the offer from Cashman & Co., C.C. is silent as a mouse. What's worse is the fact that there are rumblings of other players (like A.J. Burnett and Mark Tex) getting ready to make decisions about their respective futures. So, C.C.'s lack of action and the potential-action of others, has finally put the Yankees in a very unstable situation.

That being said, it's time for Brian "Akbar" Cashman to go on the offensive: set a deadline and prepare to pull the offer to Sabathia.

You know what? Fuck 'em. If C.C. wants to play on the West Coast, more power to him, but the Yankees cannot wait around and let that Death Star of a waistband take us down with him. If the Bombers pull their offer from the table, C.C. will undoubtedly get his wish of where to play, but at a helluva lot less moolah. Sounds fair to me. He'll have to pay a restocking fee for his procrastination, but he'll have what he wants.

On the other hand, a Yankee-imposed deadline could freak the guy out and make him jump to the dotted line, like a splash of cold water to the face. Sabathia can't be waiting for the Yankees to up their offer because, frankly, nobody is going to match it. If it's money he wants, it's money we have, and it's money he shall share. So, what's the hold up? Stop letting him dictate. Essentially, a deadline will force Sabathia to reconcile his true desire: geography, or money. In his heart of hearts, I'm sure he knows which wins.

Regardless, though, if Cashman forces everybody's hand in this stalemate, one thing (at least) is certain: the Yankees won't be totally screwed at the end of it...and, really, that's all we good people of New York care about.

We will not fight you, C.C. There's still good in you. We can feel it.

But, seriously, make up your fucking mind.
_

He Who Must Not Be Named

Something wicked this way comes.

With Dan Giese now headed to the DL, the Yankees are suddenly in need of a 4th starter.

Rumblings have grown into whispers, and whispers (I fear) will soon turn to chilled cries of horror.

Carl Pavano may be ready to return to The Bronx.

If this misfortune is due to befall us, it is understandable. The Connecticut Kid's contract is coming off of the books and the Yankees might certainly want to squeeze some "production" out of their prized, walking infirmary. What's more, when your other pitching option is Phil Hughes, the (former?) crown jewel of prospects, it seems logical that Pavano becomes the guy you rush. What does Brian Cashman care if Pavano is not quite "there"? Get on the mound, dipshit.

So, on the ever-more-realistic chance that Carl makes it back to the Bigs (without incident), here are the possible outcomes, as I see them.

Please choose one of the following:

A) Carl Pavano returns and is abysmal; the Yankees miss the playoffs, and Carl rides, ever-so-quietly, into the sunset, never to be heard from again.

B) Carl Pavano returns and is astoundingly good; the Yankees ride to a world championship on Carl's fragile back; Carl is rewarded by Brian Cashman (whose job has been saved) with a new contract and his career is reborn.

C) Carl Pavano returns and removes himself from his first start in the 3rd inning, citing an unspecified "soreness" that no medical test can confirm or locate; Carl is never heard from again.

D) Car Pavano returns and pitches with a Darrell Rasner-esque mediocrity; the Yankees miss the playoffs, but Carl's performance is just passable enough to warrant a $1 million, incentive-laden, 1-year contract from...let's say...the St. Louis Cardinals.

Personally, I'll vote "D," not only because it's baseball economics at its finest, but because Pavano's stealing money from the Yankees for four years and then parlaying that theft into yet another contract feels like the appropriate way for this whole disaster to end.

Thoughts? Alternative (more infuriating) scenarios?
_

Riddle Me This

I wrote the other day of Mariano Rivera's bizarre tendency to spit the bit in non-save situations. It happened to be an evening on which he allowed a homerun in "garbage time" against the Baltimore Orioles. The homerun ended up being the difference, after a 9th inning rally by the Yankees came up one run short.

It has happened again tonight, but this time the pill is even more bitter. Once again, Rivera coughed-up a game; this time to the Anaheim Angels; this time in what was a 0-0 game.

My frustration over this strange tendency of The Sandman's should not confused with WFAN - esque overreaction. I'm not saying that Rivera is "losing it," or that he's not still a dominant pitcher. What I am saying, though, is that his "Save" situation vs. "Non-Save" situation splits are ridiculous and warrant heavy, heavy scrutiny. Observe:

Save Situations (2008):
Games: 26
Saves: 26
Innings: 27.1
Earned Runs: 1 (!)
ERA: 0.33 (!)
WHIP: 0.52 (!)
Homeruns: 0
Strikeouts: 33

Non-Save Situations (2008)
Games: 18
Innings: 21
Earned Runs: 7
ERA: 3.43
WHIP: 1.00
Homeruns: 3
Strikeouts: 25

Taken alone, the "Non-Save" splits are fine (probably better than a large percentage of closers); however, compared to the "Save" splits, it is obvious that Rivera is simply a different pitcher this year when the situation is not, shall we say, dire. His "Non-Save" ERA is 10 x higher than his "Save" ERA (which is, admittedly, inhuman), his WHIP doubles when he's not protecting a lead, he shows a proclivity for the long ball, and his strikeout ratio suffers.

After Mo gave up the winning run tonight, Michael Kay wondered aloud if the "adrenaline rush" is just not the same for Rivera in non-save situations. This is lunacy on two fronts: 1) In a 0-0 game in the 9th inning, against the best team in baseball, on a night when you find yourself 1.5 games back of a Wild Card birth and 4.5 games out of your division, to say that Rivera lacked adrenaline is just plain lazy analysis; 2) Mariano Rivera is in the first year of a contract that will pay him $45,000,000. Is it really that hard to pump it up?

To place the blame on Rivera for a loss like this is unfair -- the team had five hits and looked uninspired on all offensive fronts -- but it's time to wonder aloud why our Hall-of-Fame-closer can't handle a tie game. Is it an anomoly, or is there an answer?
_

Hi! My Name Is: Jorge Posada (C)

Each day, "Piss and Wynegar" will present Yankees "player previews" for the coming 2008 season. In what can only be referred to as a "revelatory" strategy, we will use statistics, as well as opinion, to further our analysis.

Starting in about July of last season, we began to lament the torrid start to which Jorge Posada had gotten off. We believed, as had been demonstrated in the past, that Jorge was destined to “regress to the mean” and finish the year mired in a slump that would see his offensive production fall off the face of the Earth and land him at the usual .275 / .380 / .480. Much to our surprise, though, Jorge not only maintained his performance, he was still improving at the end of September.

If ever evidence is compiled to prove the existence of “contract year magic,” those compilers will look no further than to the 2007 version of Jorge Posada. His OBP (.426) was forty-five points above his career average, while his SLG (.543) and AVG (.338) were both sixty points above his career average. Add in a career-high in hits (171, which demolished his previous personal best by 26) and you can write your own check And, ostensibly, Jorge did just that, as he was able to finagle a fourth year out of an already lucrative deal that has made him the highest paid catcher in history.

As the crow flies, Posada is due for a statistical drop-off in ‘08. No 36-year-old player – a catcher, no less – can be expected to buck his well-established offensive trends for more than a year. And, most likely, by the time 2011 rolls around and Posada is 40, has had two knee replacement surgeries, and is one of four Yankees designated hitters, NY sports radio callers will be cursing the contract, as all long-term deals to aging players are eventually cursed. But, at least, Jorge is our aging superstar. We watched him grow and, by God, we will watch him wither and die.

To read earlier "Hi! My Name Is" entries, click here.

Hi! My Name Is: Robinson Cano (2B)

Each day, "Piss and Wynegar" will present Yankees "player previews" for the coming 2008 season. In what can only be referred to as a "revelatory" strategy, we will use statistics, as well as opinion, to further our analysis.

Hip-hip, Cano! This veritable Lou Gehrig (What? He lead the team in games played with 160. Duh.) truly is an exciting young man to watch; “exciting,” in this instance, carrying a multitude of positive connotations and a smidgen of negative meaning. It’s hard not to love Robbie at the plate, as no one seems to go on a tear quite like him and, like a Major Leaguer with genuine staying power, he’s improving each year. The only possible caveat to his development is the hefty contract he signed in the off-season, which could lead to world domination or frustrating complacency. Hopefully, it’s the former.

Robinson saw career numbers in HR, RBI, and runs scored in ‘07. He even demonstrated burgeoning patience, improving his BB/AB ratio from 1/27 in ’06, to 1/16 last season. Not bad, especially when one considers that, at times, Cano enjoys swinging at balls that are simply being thrown out of play in-between pitches.

On the flipside, Cano still has some maturing to do. His .353 OBP last season placed him sixth amongst starters, and plate discipline might very well be the culprit. Moreover, Robbie took some heat from game analysts for a weak batting average with bases loaded (.250), and with runners in scoring position and 2-outs (.250). A discipline issue as well? Probably too early to tell, and too small a sample size, but we’ll keep watching nonetheless.

In the field, Cano posted a .984 fielding percentage, but did illicit criticism for occasional lackadaisical defense. If he has an Achilles’ heel, it may be a tendency to non-chalant some grounders. Ideally, this trait will recede with age and a new manager. Like his buddy, Melky, Robinson does some awesome dances in the dugout but, thankfully, his real talent lies in playing the game of baseball.

To read previous "Hi! My Name Is" entries, click here.