Random thought of the day: Loosen up

Time for a Friday Tuesday poll: Should the Yanks finally relax their no facial hair/no long hair rules?

The polls are now open, directly to your left.

The inevitable: Padres for sale

Is anyone shocked?

San Diego Padres owner John Moores told MLB.com this weekend that he has hired Goldman Sachs to identify potential buyers for the ballclub.
......
Moores said selling any part of the club does involve a much-publicized personal wrinkle: the pending divorce between him and his wife, Becky.

Together, they own 90 percent of the team, and because of community property laws in the state of California, Becky shares 50 percent of that asset. She must agree to any sale, and in the event that they can't come to an agreement, the California state court presiding over the divorce would be the arbitrator.

Thanks to ShysterBall for the alert and the Delta Burke reference, which is always good.

Gamesmanship versus cheating

Apparently, when it happened in a historically meaningful game more than 50 years ago, it's both charming and nostalgic. When it happens in the last decade and a half, it's subpoena-worthy:

Sign-stealing by mechanical means was outlawed by baseball in 1961. As for that episode a decade earlier, “I didn’t feel guilty about anything,” [Sal] Yvars told Prager. “I was just doing my job.”

The link above is the obituary for Sal Yvars, a back-up catcher on the NY Giants team that won the pennant when Bobby Thompson hit his "shot heard 'round the world" against Ralph Branca.

When Branca delivered his fateful pitch, a high inside fastball, did Thomson know what was coming? “I gave him the sign,” Yvars told The New York Times in 2001. But Thomson told Prager that he had been concentrating so heavily that he had not looked toward Yvars.

Bottom line, cheating is cheating. Unless it's on grainy black and while film and we wax philosophical about that time and the good old days. Because it wasn't yet illegal by definition (though clearly in against the spirit of the rules), it's gamesmanship. Just not for PED's.


(Thanks to Ron Rollins for the tip)

Who is worse for baseball: Yankees or Padres?

This topic was not my creation. I caught a bit of the MLB Home Plate morning show on XM radio (channel 175) on my way into work today. Admittedly, I am just getting into this as I recently switched from Sirius to XM*. The chatter of the day was the question: Which team is worse for baseball, the Yanks or the Padres.

* Pos-like aside: I had a Sirius unit installed when I got my car in 2005, even though XM came pre-installed. I just liked the music selections better. Now that programming is almost identical, I switched to XM (better signal strength, cheaper with my wife having XM too) which gave me access to MLB Home Plate (all baseball, all the time) and will eventually give me radio access to every game for every team. I'm getting into the discussions a bit.

The easy answer to the above question is the Yanks due to their payroll and spending. They are flaunting their money while most teams are cutting back, shedding office staff, etc. They are routinely the highest payroll with very little to show for it the last few years.

Then there are the Padres. They are slashing payroll to something in the neighborhood of $40m. No player is untradable. Heck, they let legend Trevor Hoffman go and maybe you heard that they are trying to unload Peavy. Their owner, John Moores, is going thru a divorce that threatens his ability to own the team. The team has no chance to be competitive for many years, unless they can get the bounty they are looking for to deal Peavy...and even then, it might take several years.

So what's worse for the "game of baseball"? A team that overspends or a team that underspends?

I'm not so biased that I can't see that many of the things the Yanks are doing aren't good for the name of "competitive balance", but there's nothing against the rules of spending. And, as of now, they will be bringing their payroll down in 2009, even if they go and add Teixeira after Sabathia and Burnett. Sure, it looks ugly when they do it because it's so over the top. Did the Yanks really need to tack on the extra year for both Burnett and Sabathia? Well, yes. The cost of not getting these guys was greater than the risk of getting them. Sure there is risk in both pitchers' arms and bodies. But if the Yanks have to eat the last few years of either/both contract, that's a pittance in their overall operating budget. If you dropped a $20 bill and lost it, you'd be angry at yourself but you wouldn't have to change your lifestyle. If the Yanks have to eat the last two years of each contract, so be it.

Except MLB, across the board, is better off when the Yanks are doing well. The team drives attendance everywhere they go. They pay a ton of money to other teams via revenue sharing and luxury tax payments. HUGE amounts of money. It's one thing to spend like a madman, it's entirely something else when you are paying an extra 40% on those binges to give to their competition. Hating the Yanks is good for business.

And not for nothing, MLB has to be the only business where outsiders (you, me, the fans) are pro-Management instead of pro-Labor. Just saying... Would you want GM to push the hourly rates for their workers down so their management could make more money? No, you want labor to get what they can for putting the product on the road (or field, as the case should be).

Now, the Padres have summarily sandbagged their fans' hope for the 2009 season and at least the next few years. They will not have a Rays-like resurgence, which was the result of many, many years of sub-basement performance which resulted in a bevy of top-of-the-draft players finally maturing at once. The Padres, if not sold to an owner who is committed to spending, will be terrible for the foreseeable future. I wish this wasn't so, but it it is. They weaken the competition for the NL West teams, giving an unfair advantage to the Dodgers and D'backs, who already get to feast on the Giants and Rockies. Post that against the backdrop of the NL East featuring the Braves, Mets and Champion Phillies.

The Padres do not drive attendance. They will absorb revenue sharing/luxury tax receipts with nothing to show for in terms of on-field talent. They are shafting their fans who will pay full price for a AAAA team. And that's a vicious circle they've created. Fewer fans will come, lowering their revenue base, which will, in turn, lower they spending further.

The Yanks will have over 4 million fans come to their new Cathedral, which they helped pay for, like it or not. Seating prices will be crazy, as will concessions. Parking was already silly (but at least there will be a MetroNorth stop for Westchester residents like me). But at least we know we have ownership who is committed to putting their money where their gaping mouths are. It comes off as obnoxious and offensive because it is. But don't forget that their payroll will be lower than last year despite moving into TNYS. And by lower, I mean that it will still be the highest in the game.

What's worse? The ownership who overspends or the ownership that underspends? Worse to thumb your nose at the issues affecting everyone else or to thumb your nose at your singular fan base?

Buster on the Yanks, prospects

Just a bit from Buster on the Yanks and their keeping of their prospects:

On the front end, both teams would have been required to surrender their top pitching prospects -- for the Red Sox, that was Jon Lester, and for the Yankees, that was Phil Hughes -- and then they would have to pay Santana like he was a free agent. It was such an extraordinary price that even some folks in the Mets' organization wondered, after getting Santana, whether it was the right thing to do.

The argument that several executives made with the Red Sox and Yankees was that if you were patient -- patient -- then you might have a shot at a pitcher much like Santana in CC Sabathia, and the cost would only have one layer. Sure, you'd have to give him a huge contract, but you wouldn't have to give up top prospects along the way.

So the Yankees, in the end, were patient and got Sabathia, and the pundits who are saying that the team has blown up its plan for player development are simply not paying attention. In fact, the signings of Sabathia and A.J. Burnett are absolutely in keeping with the refocus on the farm system.

None of this is a guarantee of a playoff visit, no matter how much money is spent. The RedSox and Rays are formidable and equally talented. But it sure makes the team better than it was last year. And that's the point.

Madoff's Ponzi scheme hits the Mets

For those not tuned into the remarkable $50B Ponzi scheme collapse, it's hit Mets' ownership hard:

But interviews Saturday with several people with knowledge of Wilpon’s business dealings revealed concern about significant problems that Wilpon and the Mets could encounter because of the reported fraud. Although it is unclear how much money Wilpon may recoup, any significant financial loss by a team owner raises questions about how those losses may affect the franchise.

Burnett's on the way?

If you believe this from GAKIII, he sure is:

Talking to a Yankee recently, A.J. Burnett informed the player they were going to be teammates.

"He wants to come to New York - those words came out of his mouth," the player told The Post last night. "He really wants to play here."

From all indications, Burnett will join CC Sabathia at the top of the Yankee rotation, and the deal could be sealed as early as today.

Five years? Can't they give him a 3 year out, too?

UPDATE (12/12/08, 6:31pm): So it's done. Just got home so I'll try to get something up later tonite.

Free agent right-hander A.J. Burnett has reached preliminary agreement on a five-year, $82.5 million contract with the New York Yankees.

The Yankees made a late charge to beat out the Atlanta Braves for Burnett, who went 18-10 with a 4.07 ERA in 35 starts with Toronto this season. Burnett won 10 of his last 12 decisions. He set career highs in wins, strikeouts (231) and innings (221 1/3).

Updated thoughts on the Sabathia opt-out

Courtesy of Ken Davidoff:

Here is the column I wrote about CC Sabathia. After I sent this column, I ran into a friend of CC's, and he agreed wholly with my take: CC will be so outta here in three years. Which could very well be a good thing for the Yankees.

How much does CC prefer the West Coast over the East Coast? "He hates having spring training in Florida," the friend said.

As I wrote, there's every reason that CC will give everything he has to the Yankees for three years. But the idea that he'll want to stay in New York after that? No. And if you're a Yankees fan, you've got to love the idea of bidding him adieu well before his decline phase kicks in.

Ya know what, I'll take three kickass years from CC and then worry about replacing him, and not worrying about the last few years. Again, if his arm falls off before then, forget I ever said this.

More from Davidoff's linked-to column:

Sabathia's reputation is golden. There's every reason to think that, despite the obvious reality that New York did not rank as his first choice, he'll embrace his role as the Yankees' ace. That he'll give all he has, just as he did to the '08 Brewers during what he knew was a temporary stay.

He'll bring his heart to New York; he won't leave it in San Francisco. And yet ... By the time the 2011 season concludes, Barry Zito will have just two years left on the gargantuan contract he signed with the Giants in December 2006. Tim Lincecum will be two years away from free agency. Matt Cain will be a free agent. The Giants will have the roster flexibility necessary to welcome in Sabathia, at a still young 31.

And the Yankees, they hope, will have developed enough young arms - from the group of Dellin Betances, Jeremy Bleich, Andrew Brackman, Joba Chamberlain, Phil Hughes and whoever else emerges - that they can cheer when Sabathia relieves them of their remaining, four-year, $92-million commitment.

When that happens, then history will officially smile on Brian Cashman's decision a year ago not to trade Hughes and other chips for Johan Santana. Just think: While the Mets will be sweating out Santana's health in 2013, monitoring the progress of the four players they gave to Minnesota, the Yankees will already have been in and out with Sabathia, while surrendering only a draft pick.

Now, let's not ignore the obvious downside of this transaction: What if Sabathia is terrible and miserable these first three years? What if, three years from now, he can't even sniff four years and $92 million on the open market?

That's a long shot, first of all. If it does happen, though, then the Yankees probably would have to ship Sabathia to the Giants or Dodgers and pay a lot of the freight. That would be a highly unpleasant experience. But really, what is the chance that's how it will go down?

Resistance is futile

I've tried to keep away from the Farnsworth signing, but I just couldn't resist after reading this:

Removing situation from the equation, Farnsworth would have contributed less to the Royals bullpen last year than Jimmy Gobble. I wasn't sure that was possible.
.....
Who am I kidding? This is a bad contract for a below average pitcher. This is not how the Royals should build their bullpen.

Good luck, Royals fans.


UPDATE (12/12/08, 10:20am): Just getting thru Pos' latest manifesto and he touches on the Farnsworth deal and well, I just couldn't resist. It's futile.

I do not at all like the Kansas City Royals signing of reliever Kyle Farnsworth. I do not like it in a house. I do not like it with a mouse. I do not like it for two-years, $9.25 million, but I would not like it if it was two-years, 17 bucks and a box of Ho Hos. Royals general manager Dayton Moore asked me what I thought about it, and I told HIM I do not like it. Not that he should care about that.

But I do not like it, do … not … like … it. I do not like it because Farnsworth hasn’t even been league average the last three years. I do not like it because he throws a million miles an hour and can’t get people out. I do not like it because he once slammed reliever Jeremy Affeldt to the turf during a brawl and later could not even explain why. I do not like it because I would NEVER go out and spend $4-plus million on a volatile seventh or eighth inning reliever. I’m hoping that I am making myself clear here — I DO NOT LIKE THIS SIGNING.

Last Peavy post...for now

After this, I am done riffing on the dynamic of leverage at play in the Peavy saga. I've written too many words on this, been mocked and ridiculed (maybe rightfully so) and frankly, I'm tired of the whole saga. But I'm not alone in those watching the dynamics of the leverage with this thing:

What they learned Thursday is that their leverage is more limited than they would like and that their desperation is apparent.
......
Every baseball executive is aware of the Padres' financial plight, of the divorce proceedings that have cut off the cash flow from owner John Moores and prompted a severe payroll purge. Most rational observers, then, expect the Peavy discount to deepen until the pitcher's $63 million contract can be unloaded.

Towers reiterated Thursday that the Padres would not trade Peavy unless the deal made solid baseball sense, but acknowledged holding on to the pitcher effectively tied his hands in other areas. Because moving Peavy would make for improved maneuverability and keeping him could be catastrophic in the event of an injury, an eventual trade is still the way to bet.

If you can't afford to make the payments, you can't afford to keep the car.

This last comment is precisely why I think Peavy will be traded. Cubs, Angels, Yanks. Someone with cash and prospects, or the creativity to get that which they are lacking.

Will NYC weigh on Sabathia?

Personally, I think he's got the right sort of disposition to handle the critics, the disarming personality that the press corps will eat up. But the Daily News' Bob Raissman is a bit more concerned:

Not only can Sabathia look forward to having each start - win or lose - over-analyzed by the media, he will hear about Santana, too. Al Yankzeera is likely preparing to alert the free world to the TV ratings Sabathia generates each and every time he pitches, but only if they are better than the numbers generated by Santana when he hurls on SNY.

The CC to-do checklist, please: Collect major moolah; participate in a prefabricated pitching "rivalry"; juice Al Yank ratings. Help fill expensive seats at the new Yankee Stadium. Be a significant force in taking the Bombers deep into October.

And if all that isn't enough, Sabathia can also look forward to having his off-field movements scrutinized, too. Along with the dough comes official Yankee celebrity status. Sabathia's name is about to transcend the sports pages. Gossip, anyone? His family will share in this lovely experience.

I had to post that only because I never heard the term Al Yankzeera before to describe the YES Network. I love it.

This, however, is the real concern and as I said in the open, I think CC has the right personality to deal with it. And surely new buddy Jeter will help him navigate the waters.

"I know CC well enough to know he didn't really want to go to New York," said Sheldon Ocker, the veteran Indians beat writer for the Akron Beacon Journal. "I don't think it (Sabathia's reluctance) was about the Yankees, but it was the city. The media stuff might wear on him. I don't know. He certainly is aware of what he's getting into. And I'm sure he has it in his head that he can deal with it (the New York media), but when you face the reality of it it's sometimes different."

Towers overplayed his hand

So the Peavy-to-the-Cubs deal is seemingly dead. No surprise given that Towers wanted a "Hershel Walker type deal".

I can't help but think Towers overplayed a losing hand. There are only two ways out of this that will be good for Towers:

1. Trade Peavy to an American league team that can afford his contract and has the prospects to deal (Angels, Yanks were on his "approved list")
2. Peavy has a dominating first half of the 2009 season and then flips Peavy at the trade deadline

Other than that, I think Towers is stuck with an over-priced asset at a discount shop with an owner pushing for lower costs.

Do I smell an ambush coming?

Heading into this off-season, the Yanks shed some $88 million from their payroll (mostly from Moose, Giambi, Abreu, Pettitte, Pavano).

Sabathia will cost $23m (roughly) this year. Burnett would add another $17m. Hell, add another pitcher --either Sheets or Lowe or Pettitte-- for something like $13m. That's "only" $53m. I say only with a cheesy grin on my face, knowing that's more than many teams' entire roster. If the normal contractual increases for the existing Yanks add another $15m, we're at $68m. What does that leave in order to keep the payroll on par with 2008? Some $20m bucks.

Conveniently, you know who's gonna cost about $20m/year? Some 1B who is a switch hitter, Gold Glove-caliber defender, upstanding citizen and Don Mattingly worshipping dude (which is why he wears #23).

It just feels like the Yanks are quietly lurking on the Teix scenario. If they, at the last minute, call Boras and tell him they'll match the Nationals 8 year, $160m offer, I can see them walking off with the two best players this offseason, plus at least two other very good pitchers. The Evil Empire striking again.

Obnoxious? You betchya. At least the ownership is committed. Or should be committed. Whatever.

Things that make you go....blech

I won't go so far as to shout "PICK ATLANTA!", but I'm contemplating it. This sort of offer is preposterous, in years and AAV.

The New York Yankees, making a hard late charge to beat out the Atlanta Braves for A.J. Burnett, offered the free-agent right-hander a guaranteed five-year contract Wednesday, a baseball source told ESPN.com.

The proposed deal is worth about $85 million, the source said.
......
Burnett is moving closer to making a decision on his next destination, a source told ESPN.com, and a deal could be in place as soon as Thursday.

Blech. I'm having a tough time with the extra years, the extra dollars, the extra risk. People keep saying "it's not your money; you don't have season tickets". But it offends some part of my brain that controls sense and logic. I tried to deactivate that part of my brain but failed. Three years with an attainable option 4th year would be great. Four years guaranteed, less so. Five guaranteed.... ridiculous, even with his great AL East numbers.

Looks like I'm wearing my "angry pants" today.

From MLBTradeRumors:

Yankee players have been calling Burnett, lobbying him to choose their team over the Braves.

PICK ATLANTA!

So much for working the count

So long Giambi and Abreu, perennial top 10 guys in pitches per AB. Enter Swisher and now, likely, Mike Cameron. Sure Cameron's a better CF than Melky and he's got more power, but this is a free swinger who will strike out 150+ times a year. He will also be a spry 36 by Opening Day. He owns a career .250 AVG and a beefy .340 OBP. He struck out exactly 142 times twice in the last three years, surrounding a 160 K "effort". Oy. His defense better make up for some of this.

According to Baseball-Reference.com, his Range Factor compares favorably to the league average, even last year, so that's good but how much left does he have? How good is his arm? I haven't seen a lot of him so if you have, let me know what to expect.

Remember, too, that Cameron missed 25 games last year due to a PED (amphetamines) suspension. Those 142 K's could have been north of 160.

At least CC gets an old buddy to hang with.


UPDATE: Not so fast, my friends, from MLBTradeRumors.com:

11:49am: Joel Sherman talked to a top exec involved in the talks who called the Chances of a deal "remote."
11:17am: Ken Rosenthal says the potential deal hit a roadblock over the Yankees' desire to have Milwaukee pick up part of the tab on Cameron. Also, the Brewers want a second player after Cabrera. Tom Haudricourt says the Yankees tried to unload Kei Igawa on them.
9:28am: The Cabrera for Cameron deal is close but not done, according to Joel Sherman's source. He says the Brewers could receive a pitcher as well, with the quality depending on whether they'll assume salary.
8:41am: Tom Haudricourt is not sure this is done. He says the Yankees like Bill Hall as well. The Brewers could gain quite a bit of payroll flexibility here. It'd be interesting to see all three Brewers friends (including Sabathia) move to the Yanks.

Getting CC makes Peavy happy

See, you guys keep mocking the "obsession", but I'll continue to say that "he with the biggest wallet has the most negotation power". And if your target is happier now that you've hooked Sabathia, well, you get this:

If the reports are true that the Yankees will get ace pitcher CC Sabathia, the Yankees just became more attractive to Jake Peavy, but that doesn't mean Peavy suddenly is clamoring to wear pinstripes.

"The Yankees would be more attractive if they get Sabathia," Peavy's agent, Barry Axelrod, said going into this week's winter meetings.

But Axelrod cautioned that Peavy prefers to stay in the National League and that New York isn't his first choice geographically.

The Cubs and Padres are deep in talks on a Peavy trade. If those talks collapse, the Yankees might become more of a factor.

Maybe you've heard me say that a time or twelve.

I'll clarify my stance one more time, lest there be any confusion. I am concerned about Peavy in the AL East. I am concerned about his arm problems as much as I am with Sheets. But he did win a Cy Young recently and can still be a quality pitcher, especially when he won't be relied upon as your number one guy. I'm concerned, period.

Picture the Yanks sitting across the table with the Padres after the Cubs deal (theoretically) falls apart, staring Towers in the face...

Cashman: Kevin, we all know you need to dump Peavy's salary. One quarter of your payroll will be sucked in by this. I'll send you Melky, Kennedy, Igawa and one other lower level prospect. Kennedy and Igawa will do fine in the NL West.
Towers: C'mon Brian, we've been friends for years. Why you doing this to me?
Cashman: Not personal, Kev, just business.
Towers: I don't like it. Who are those big guys in the corner, anyways?
Cashman: Never mind them. I feel for you; your fans already are backing away and a terrible season looms. But at least this gives you some MLB-ready talent to fill the uniforms. How's John Moores' divorce going? As brutal as we hear? Face it, Kev, you have no choice but to take this. It's the only lifeline you have left. Cubs are out. So are the Cardinals, Angels, Braves, Astros. He doesn't want to go to Boston or any other AL team. You've got this offer or you can bleed cash with a disgruntled Peavy on your roster in April.
Towers: You have no idea. I'll contact Peavy to approve the trade. You'll have the paperwork by morning. Hey, come back here with my lunch!

Neyer & Law: newest BBWAA voters

After the outcry from last year's exclusion, Keith Law and Rob Neyer (both from ESPN) have been selected to join the BBWAA. Also selected are Will Carroll and Christina Kahrl of Baseball Prospectus.

Kudos!

Brilliant!

I sure wish I thought of this, seen at IT IS HIGH, IT IS FAR....

BREAKING: Hank Steinbrenner May Replace Obama as U.S. Senator from Illinois

Offer on the table: Six years, $140 million

Sabathia's deal: There's an opt-out

From MLBTradeRumors:

10:14am: Tim Brown and Gordon Edes of Yahoo report that the deal is for $161MM over seven years (which would top Johan's average annual value).

The deal has an opt-out clause after the first three years, which are worth $69MM. The 31 year-old Sabathia will make his opt-out decision after the 2011 season with four years, $92MM remaining on the deal. He would have to buck the opt-out trend (or renegotiate) to make this more than a three-year, $69MM deal for the Yankees. That is not necessarily a bad thing for them.

Gotta say, if CC performs SO well that he wants to opt out of the remaining four years, that'd be great. Great that the Yanks got three great years. Great that they could be out of the balance of the deal which is where the risk lies. Of course, if he underperforms, well, all bets off.

J.C. Bradbury: Yanks paying what he is worth

For the sabermetric/economists amongst us:

Apparently, CC Sabathia and the New York Yankees have agreed to a seven-year $160 million contract, which is just under $23 million per season. Previously, I had projected Sabathia to be worth $24 million in a six-year deal. (Since I made that initial estimate, I corrected a minor error in my model that resulted in a very slight undervaluing of Sabathia.)

For the next seven years, I have Sabathia valued at just under $26 million a season, so the Yankees are paying about what he is worth.