Mecca wrote:nykballa2k4 wrote:Mecca wrote:
Sale was never an option. We weren't giving up significant assets. Bruce is still a 1 year rental. We're not taking on more salary until 2018.
We're not moving prospects for a pitcher.
Obviously it's Cashman's call. Yankees would be better served with a young pitching prospect for two hitting ones. (obviously value has to be right)
I agree. I want to do the same thing. Our pitching staff is brutal lol. But our formula is devaluing the starting pitcher.
I am a basketball first kind of person, so I have my perspective based on things I have seen in basketball. I am reminded of the Detroit Pistons and the Sixers (Larry Brown eras). Teams that had a great foundation but needed one more piece, one more ingredient. Pistons ultimately got that with Sheed resulting in the ring.
I think that in baseball, the game is to collect assets because player movement is so fluid. Cashman has the right idea in developing a farm and it would be reckless for him to say.. move your new shiny catcher for Matt Harvey (who is soon to be paid and no longer all that young), or for a Kershaw (again big $ investment, years under his belt making him vulnerable to injury and a decline). But if there is a young pitcher (Jose Quintana?) for say Frazier and Mateo... well that helps on a couple fronts Quintana has less mileage than say a Kershaw (though at 28 roughly the same age) and his $ is considered team-friendly for the next 4 seasons.
I like the strategy of building strength on strength (leaving one area like SP weak during the build) then splurging on high-end pieces to turn good into godly. Bruce for a Abreu and Mason Williams could be a low cost sort of deal that enables some of the other prospects to become that elite SP. Of course you trade a redundant piece like Garnder in the process for someone else's C+/B- prospect and you wind up with Gardner+B- for Bruce.
