+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 13 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 12 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 306
  1. #26
    Yankees your 27 time WS Champs MyBoysKaosHavoK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    2112 The Temples Of Syrinx....

    Re: The 197M thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by albo4lyfe View Post
    I say, bite the bullet with Ellsbury and eat 50MM leaving him at 3/18. I think some team would take Ellsbury at 6MM a year for 3 years. We'd save 6MM a year and a valuable roster spot.

    Gardner-Hicks-Judge-Stanton. Move Frazier plus others for a young, cost-controller TOR starter.
    ^^^This^^^

    Gotta get rid of him. Problem is his no trade....
    In the Land of the Blind. The One Eyed Man is King......

  2. #27
    Yogi Buck
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Florida

    Re: The 197M thread.

    Hard to move Headley now that Torres is needed at second.

    I'd say Torres, Wade and Thairo will fight it out in spring training for 2b.

    Maybe they can move Headley in a few months and save some of his pay if Andujar can take the 3b job. Heck, maybe you roll the dice now and give Andujar or the 2b loser the job out of ST.

    If they go and get another SP, it's gonna need to be somebody cost controlled. Unless they can move somebody else. Which means it is probably gonna be expensive prospect wise. Could move Robertson but love the pen and hate to mess with it. I guess Gardner has to be the one to go since he is the easiest to move and he makes good money. Gardner package with prospects for a #1/#2 would work for me. Just can't be anyone we need to use.

    I just don't see anybody taking Ellsbury unless the Yanks pay almost the entire contract. Which is worthless.

    I'd say go with 4 SP for as long in April as possible. Severino/Tanaka/Gray/Montgomery. Bring up one of the rooks to fill the 5th starter roll to see what you have. Then look for a #1 starter in June/July when you only have to pay/count 1/2 a years salary towards the luxury tax.
    [B]WARNING![/B] This post may be offensive to little girly men or women with soft feelings.

    Never [B]argue with an idiot[/B]. They'll bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.

  3. #28

    Re: The 197M thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by budstinks View Post
    Hard to move Headley now that Torres is needed at second.

    I'd say Torres, Wade and Thairo will fight it out in spring training for 2b.

    Maybe they can move Headley in a few months and save some of his pay if Andujar can take the 3b job. Heck, maybe you roll the dice now and give Andujar or the 2b loser the job out of ST.

    If they go and get another SP, it's gonna need to be somebody cost controlled. Unless they can move somebody else. Which means it is probably gonna be expensive prospect wise. Could move Robertson but love the pen and hate to mess with it. I guess Gardner has to be the one to go since he is the easiest to move and he makes good money. Gardner package with prospects for a #1/#2 would work for me. Just can't be anyone we need to use.

    I just don't see anybody taking Ellsbury unless the Yanks pay almost the entire contract. Which is worthless.

    I'd say go with 4 SP for as long in April as possible. Severino/Tanaka/Gray/Montgomery. Bring up one of the rooks to fill the 5th starter roll to see what you have. Then look for a #1 starter in June/July when you only have to pay/count 1/2 a years salary towards the luxury tax.
    I'd be very surprised if Headley is moved. They need someone to play 3B and also back-up 1B. His salary isn't crazy.

    Priority #1 should be to move Ellsbury. If you can't do that, then MAYBE you think about moving Gardner. I wouldn't be a huge fan of that deal, but I would understand it's necessity. They could also just throw prospects at the SP problem.

  4. #29
    NYYF Legend

    DJ27's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Black Hills of South Dakota

    Re: The 197M thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by budstinks View Post
    Hard to move Headley now that Torres is needed at second.

    I'd say Torres, Wade and Thairo will fight it out in spring training for 2b.

    Maybe they can move Headley in a few months and save some of his pay if Andujar can take the 3b job. Heck, maybe you roll the dice now and give Andujar or the 2b loser the job out of ST.

    If they go and get another SP, it's gonna need to be somebody cost controlled. Unless they can move somebody else. Which means it is probably gonna be expensive prospect wise. Could move Robertson but love the pen and hate to mess with it. I guess Gardner has to be the one to go since he is the easiest to move and he makes good money. Gardner package with prospects for a #1/#2 would work for me. Just can't be anyone we need to use.

    I just don't see anybody taking Ellsbury unless the Yanks pay almost the entire contract. Which is worthless.

    I'd say go with 4 SP for as long in April as possible. Severino/Tanaka/Gray/Montgomery. Bring up one of the rooks to fill the 5th starter roll to see what you have. Then look for a #1 starter in June/July when you only have to pay/count 1/2 a years salary towards the luxury tax.
    Adding Clint Frazier to Ellsbury should make it possible.
    Speak softly but carry a big stick.

  5. #30

    Re: The 197M thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by DJ27 View Post
    Adding Clint Frazier to Ellsbury should make it possible.
    I proposed this I think in the Stanton thread. I would be an incredibly tough pill to swallow, but I think it'd be worth it long-term. I also wonder if just taking a whole bunch of higher upside prospects in the 50-80 range of our system would help alleviate the financial burden.

  6. #31

    Re: The 197M thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by s3antana5757 View Post
    I proposed this I think in the Stanton thread. I would be an incredibly tough pill to swallow, but I think it'd be worth it long-term. I also wonder if just taking a whole bunch of higher upside prospects in the 50-80 range of our system would help alleviate the financial burden.
    No way in hell am I including Frazier to unload Ellsbury.

  7. #32
    NYYF Legend

    DJ27's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Black Hills of South Dakota

    Re: The 197M thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by NYYfan4life90 View Post
    No way in hell am I including Frazier to unload Ellsbury.
    In this situation it makes sense.... unless they can get a stud SP including Frazier (which is probably not realistic),
    Speak softly but carry a big stick.

  8. #33

    Re: The 197M thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by DJ27 View Post
    In this situation it makes sense.... unless they can get a stud SP including Frazier (which is probably not realistic),
    Makes sense for what?

    Listen, if you can get him for a cost controlled ace type pitcher that's still young enough, then sure, trade Frazier.

    But, to include him in a trade with Ellsbury? Hell no....

  9. #34

    Re: The 197M thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by NYYfan4life90 View Post
    Makes sense for what?

    Listen, if you can get him for a cost controlled ace type pitcher that's still young enough, then sure, trade Frazier.

    But, to include him in a trade with Ellsbury? Hell no....
    Don't worry Cashman is not doing that.

  10. #35
    NYYF Legend

    longtimeyankeefan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    The eternal state of optimism that the Yankees will win it all

    Re: The 197M thread.

    People will look at Romine's $1.2M projected arbitration number and see an easy DFA candidate to free up luxury tax space, but the Yankees will need to replace his spot on the roster, so only about $650K will be saved - and that assumes that a rookie like Higgy takes his spot. Sign a veteran backup and the savings are gone.

    Same issue for Shreve - minimal savings. I also think the Adam Warren arb figure listed ($3.1M) is light.

    The one arbitration case that I find palpable to trade is Betances. I still fear what will happen if the arbitration goes against him - will he again be moody about the results? In addition, I am not convinced that he will thrive in the setup role.
    Last edited by longtimeyankeefan; 12-10-17 at 03:38 PM.
    Forgive me for taking the Contrarian view

  11. #36

    Re: The 197M thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by NYYfan4life90 View Post
    No way in hell am I including Frazier to unload Ellsbury.
    If there is no other way to get under, then we'd have to. But we are not at that place.

    The top 7 of our line up will be so good. That we could easily take the risk on Wade and Torres at 2nd/3rd respectively. Even if one or the other struggle, we'll still score enough to cover them.
    Look how many we scored this past year with nothing at 1st, DH and 3rd for most of the season.

  12. #37

    Re: The 197M thread.

    I realize that I'm very likely in the small minority but I would rather trade Hicks than Frazier.

    I'm not sure Hicks will ever have higher value than he does right now and his post-all star game performance is concerning. His numbers were more in line with the 2013-2016 version of Hicks than the 3-month hot streak we saw from April-June.
    "Glory is fleeting, but obscurity is forever." - Napoleon Bonaparte (1769-1821)

  13. #38

    Re: The 197M thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zimmer's Helmet View Post
    I realize that I'm very likely in the small minority but I would rather trade Hicks than Frazier.

    I'm not sure Hicks will ever have higher value than he does right now and his post-all star game performance is concerning. His numbers were more in line with the 2013-2016 version of Hicks than the 3-month hot streak we saw from April-June.

    I guess it all comes down to who you get back.
    [SIZE=3]NYY Triforce[/SIZE]
    [SIZE=3][/SIZE]
    [SIZE=3]Phil Hughes[/SIZE]
    [SIZE=3]Joba Chamberlain[/SIZE]
    [SIZE=3]Ian Kennedy[/SIZE]

  14. #39

    Re: The 197M thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by b_joseph View Post
    If there is no other way to get under, then we'd have to. But we are not at that place.

    The top 7 of our line up will be so good. That we could easily take the risk on Wade and Torres at 2nd/3rd respectively. Even if one or the other struggle, we'll still score enough to cover them.
    Look how many we scored this past year with nothing at 1st, DH and 3rd for most of the season.
    Getting under the cap to say we got under serves no purpose. If we use the ellsbury money for something else, that is a different story. As of right now, if we were able to get rid of Ellsbury's contract, who would you sign?
    [SIZE=3]NYY Triforce[/SIZE]
    [SIZE=3][/SIZE]
    [SIZE=3]Phil Hughes[/SIZE]
    [SIZE=3]Joba Chamberlain[/SIZE]
    [SIZE=3]Ian Kennedy[/SIZE]

  15. #40
    Yogi Buck
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Florida

    Re: The 197M thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zimmer's Helmet View Post
    I realize that I'm very likely in the small minority but I would rather trade Hicks than Frazier.

    I'm not sure Hicks will ever have higher value than he does right now and his post-all star game performance is concerning. His numbers were more in line with the 2013-2016 version of Hicks than the 3-month hot streak we saw from April-June.
    I'm ok with selling high on Hicks, but can Frazier play CF? Most of his starts in the minors came in CF, but the Yanks didn't play him there once in NY.

    If not, and he may not be optimal between Judge and Stanton, then you still have no place for him to play every day, which he needs. Hicks doesn't make that much. Maybe $4-5 mil this year thru arbitration? And is much more suited to play anywhere and part time.

    And he had a 3.9 WAR in 301 ab's. IF you project his stats out for 600 ab's, he has 30 hr's, 100 runs, 100 rbi's and 100 bb's while playing a great cf.

    I'm with you though, can he duplicate those numbers for an entire year or was that just a hot streak? And its not like he was a rookie, he'll be 28 this year.

    Sure would hate to trade Frazier and then watch him hit 37 hr's for someone else.
    [B]WARNING![/B] This post may be offensive to little girly men or women with soft feelings.

    Never [B]argue with an idiot[/B]. They'll bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.

  16. #41

    Re: The 197M thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by budstinks View Post
    I'm ok with selling high on Hicks, but can Frazier play CF? Most of his starts in the minors came in CF, but the Yanks didn't play him there once in NY.

    If not, and he may not be optimal between Judge and Stanton, then you still have no place for him to play every day, which he needs. Hicks doesn't make that much. Maybe $4-5 mil this year thru arbitration? And is much more suited to play anywhere and part time.

    And he had a 3.9 WAR in 301 ab's. IF you project his stats out for 600 ab's, he has 30 hr's, 100 runs, 100 rbi's and 100 bb's while playing a great cf.

    I'm with you though, can he duplicate those numbers for an entire year or was that just a hot streak? And its not like he was a rookie, he'll be 28 this year.

    Sure would hate to trade Frazier and then watch him hit 37 hr's for someone else.
    By all accounts, Frazier can play CF. And we still have Gardner too.
    I'm just not fully sold on Hicks and if he reverts back to what he's always been, his trade value will be shot.
    "Glory is fleeting, but obscurity is forever." - Napoleon Bonaparte (1769-1821)

  17. #42

    Re: The 197M thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zimmer's Helmet View Post
    By all accounts, Frazier can play CF. And we still have Gardner too.
    I'm just not fully sold on Hicks and if he reverts back to what he's always been, his trade value will be shot.
    If that happens, he's barely a MLB at that point. I'm not totally sold on him either, but he's got a few things going for him.

    1. He's the best defensive CF currently on the roster. That doesn't change regardless of offensive numbers.

    2. He's the most affordable of the guys this year and for the foreseeable future.

    3. He's going to have great protection in the line-up and likely won't be asked to do too much. If you ran a line-up out there today, he'd likely be hitting 7th. Even if he hits .270, 20 HR and steals 10 bags, I think we'd take that. He likely would've done that with another 15-20 games last year.

    Obviously the Yankees front office is sold on him, so I'm willing to trust them at this point.

  18. #43
    NYYF Legend

    longtimeyankeefan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    The eternal state of optimism that the Yankees will win it all

    Re: The 197M thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zimmer's Helmet View Post
    I realize that I'm very likely in the small minority but I would rather trade Hicks than Frazier.

    I'm not sure Hicks will ever have higher value than he does right now and his post-all star game performance is concerning. His numbers were more in line with the 2013-2016 version of Hicks than the 3-month hot streak we saw from April-June.
    I have been in the sell high camp on Hicks the entire off-season. I fear he will regress back to his former self.

    -----------------------------------

    On a different matter - I still would not mind getting CC back, but I would like to find a way to keep his AAV down, so what about offering him a $16M, two year deal?

    He has already said (I believe) it is NYY or retirement - overpay him on a two year deal to keep the AAV impact down. If he is still throwing well going into 2019, we have a bargain. If not, keeping his AAV down has basically helped the 2018 strategy of getting under the luxury tax limit?
    Forgive me for taking the Contrarian view

  19. #44
    Reject Fascism
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    CT

    Re: The 197M thread.

    I would trade Hicks for the right price but remember he was a top prospect. It is very possible he is a late bloomer
    2018: the year the USA put children in cages

  20. #45

    Re: The 197M thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by longtimeyankeefan View Post
    I have been in the sell high camp on Hicks the entire off-season. I fear he will regress back to his former self.

    -----------------------------------

    On a different matter - I still would not mind getting CC back, but I would like to find a way to keep his AAV down, so what about offering him a $16M, two year deal?

    He has already said (I believe) it is NYY or retirement - overpay him on a two year deal to keep the AAV impact down. If he is still throwing well going into 2019, we have a bargain. If not, keeping his AAV down has basically helped the 2018 strategy of getting under the luxury tax limit?
    In theory, I can understand why you would propose that. The concern I have is the high probability of further regression as he (and his knee) gets older.

    To an extent, I'm not fully convinced that 2017 was a mirage. He may well crash and burn in 2018. On a one year deal, you can write him off and move on next year. On a 2-year deal, it becomes a waste of money.
    "Glory is fleeting, but obscurity is forever." - Napoleon Bonaparte (1769-1821)

  21. #46

    Re: The 197M thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by YankeePride1967 View Post
    I would trade Hicks for the right price but remember he was a top prospect. It is very possible he is a late bloomer
    I get that, but he'll be 28 next season.
    At what point do you just acknowledge that he is who he is?
    "Glory is fleeting, but obscurity is forever." - Napoleon Bonaparte (1769-1821)

  22. #47
    NYYF Legend

    longtimeyankeefan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    The eternal state of optimism that the Yankees will win it all

    Re: The 197M thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zimmer's Helmet View Post
    I get that, but he'll be 28 next season.
    At what point do you just acknowledge that he is who he is?
    We are on the same page here - his second half last year, admittedly after returning from injury, looks a lot more like what he has always been.
    Forgive me for taking the Contrarian view

  23. #48

    Re: The 197M thread.

    Letís get under the 197. Reset. And then be big (ina smart way) spenders.
    Baseball games are not won with a formula. If you can hit, they will find a place for you

  24. #49
    Slow in, Fast out ThePinStripes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Dallas, Tejas

    Re: The 197M thread.

    How much room do we have now?
    A fool and his money can throw one heck of a party!

  25. #50
    NYYF Legend

    JeterForPresident's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Long Island, New York

    Re: The 197M thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by ThePinStripes View Post
    How much room do we have now?
    Per Ken Rosenthal on twitter:

    "#Yankees approximately $30M under $197M luxury-tax threshold, sources tell The Athletic. Plenty of room to make other moves, and additional trades would create even more flexibility.

    1:14 PM - 12 Dec 2017"

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts