Yankees to pursue Lowe?

[CrespoBlows]

Think about this. Lowe will likely be in the 4.2-4.7ERA range. Sheets' date=' lets say for argument's sake would be around 3.7-4.0. Think about this. Lowe for 210IP at 4.50ERA or Sheets for 140IP at 3.70ERA and Rasner at 5.40ERA for 70IP.[/quote']

 

57 + 42 = 99 runs (Sheets and Rasner)

 

105 runs (Lowe)

[BSN07]

I agree. Having a 2-3 of Wang and Lowe would be nice. We need a 1 though.

 

Wow jacko admitting Wang isn't a #1 LOL

[jacksonianmarch]

57 + 42 = 99 runs (Sheets and Rasner)

 

105 runs (Lowe)

 

and by the time you reach the playoffs, you have Rasner in the rotation instead of Sheets.

[jacksonianmarch]

Sorry Jacko. The guy had a 5.42 ERA in the AL East when he was in his early 30's. He goes out to LA, in the weakest hitting division in baseball AND in a pitchers park and has an ERA in the high 3's. Remember Kevin Brown? Randy Johnson?

 

Any pitcher from the NL, specifically the NL West, is a huge risk. Will he give you innings? Sure. Will they be quality innings? No.

 

Money better allocated elsewhere. I'm not surprised that this idiot GM is going after him, nor that you support the move.

 

So because he had one bad season, you are ready to ship him off? You are absolutely hilarious. His last season with the 5.4ERA also included a playoff run that he was integral in, AND was followed by 4 yrs of absolutely solid performance. But go ahead and harp on that one season in 2004. It is WAY more relevant than the last 4 and the WS ring.

[Gom]

It is actually more relevant. You switch leagues, go to a pitchers park in a weak hitters division. Couple that with him aging 4 years as well.

 

Would I go after him? Sure. As a replacement 4th starter. Look, if you matched him against the Red Sox, he'd lose the matchup against Lester, Beckett, and Dice-K. He's win against Wakefield. Therefore, he's your number 4.

 

If you are going to give 15 million and sacrifice two picks, I'd rather get AJ. Lowe would be down on my list after CC, AJ, Tex, Sheets.

[jacksonianmarch]

so what about the 2 yrs prior where he was solid. Fact is, he's been a starter for 7 yrs now, 3 in the AL, 4 in the NL. In only one of those yrs was he bad and it was 4 yrs ago. But you choose to harp on that yr in predicting how good he's be. That is moronic

[jacksonianmarch]

Here's the deal, we're gonna be sacrificing our 1st and 2nd rounders anyway IMO. We have them guaranteed from last yr and with Abreu and possibly Marte hitting the road, we're gonna have at least 2-4 more.

[26 to 6]

Thats another thing, we only have so many draft picks. We're not going to nearly be able to sign all of these guys. No way we're getting C.C., A.J., Tex, and Lowe, etc. I don't wanna lose all of our potential first and second rounders to shell out big bucks to all these guys.

[kreinbihl34]

Here's the deal' date=' we're gonna be sacrificing our 1st and 2nd rounders anyway IMO. We have them guaranteed from last yr and with Abreu and possibly Marte hitting the road, we're gonna have at least 2-4 more.[/quote']

 

I love how you think Abreu will just walk. If the yankees offer him arb. he'll take it.

This is also the case with Marte. They will not turn down a one year deal at a higher salary.

[RedSoxRooter]

Good points, and I like Lowe. But yeah, he's no more than a good #3 in the AL East. Basically, if you're in the NL West and don't dominate - which the guy doesn't do on a regular basis - you're not going to be that good in the AL East. And he's getting old.

 

I agree with Gom on this one. Plus, like I said, I like the guy so seeing him in NY would suck.

[Dojji]

I love how you think Abreu will just walk. If the yankees offer him arb. he'll take it.

This is also the case with Marte. They will not turn down a one year deal at a higher salary.

 

 

Abreu has one more shot at a decent long-term deal. he might not take arb. And if he accepts, is that so bad?

[ORS]

You won't lose multiple 1st or 2nd round picks. Compensatory picks are protected. This is where I think they failed when they changed the rules in the last CBA. Big market teams can still sign multiple FAs and take advantage of the system.

 

Let's use 3 type A players as an example. A team signs 3, they lose their natural 1st, 2nd, and 3rd round picks. They let 3 type A players walk, they gain 2 1st round picks and a 2nd (figure at least 1 team signing their player didn't have a 1st from another move or it was protected, ie top 15) plus 3 1s picks. Let's further assume their draft position is 20 and there were 30 supplemental picks awarded.

 

The first round is 30 picks - they have 2 top 30's.

 

The supplemental round is 30 picks - they have 5 top 60's.

 

The second round is 30 picks - they have 6 top 90's.

 

The 2s round is another 20 picks, the 3rd round is another 20 until they pick, so they gave up 3 top 130's. In exchange for 3 top 130's, they get 6 top 90's.

 

What they should have done is made all picks, natural picks and compesatory picks, subject to the rules of compensation. This would do a much better job of mitigating the loophole. They could still improve their position through the supplemental rounds, but not to the degree that they can now. The way it is now, depending on who becomes available, a big market team can improve both on the field and in the draft at the same time. It runs counter to the intent of the compensation system.

 

Supposing they did change the system to what I posted, let's look at what would have happened with the example.

 

The 3 players signed would have come at the expense of their natural 1st round pick and the 2 1st round picks they were awarded. They would still get the 3 1s picks. They would have 2 in the 2nd, their natural and the awarded one, and they'd keep their 3rd round pick. It's now 6 top 130 picks, with none in the top 30, vs. 6 in the top 90 with 2 in the top 30. Much better, if you ask me.

[CrespoBlows]

and by the time you reach the playoffs' date=' you have Rasner in the rotation instead of Sheets.[/quote']

 

How do we know this is a definite?

[jacksonianmarch]

have you followed the Brewers at all?

[CrespoBlows]

have you followed the Brewers at all?

 

http://www.fallacyfiles.org/begquest.html

[jacksonianmarch]

Sheets history

 

2008, 198IP, dominant in year, but misses stretch run and post season with a torn muscle

2007, 141IP, dominant in year, but misses significant time in July, August, and Sept as the Brewers sunk into mediocrity

2006, 106IP, pretty solid when playing, misses May, June and most of July, but finishes the yr strong in Sept as Brewers miss playoffs

2005, 156IP, dominant in yr, misses most of May and all of Sept

2004, 237IP, dominant, CY candidate

2003, 220IP, mediocre season with the 4.45ERA, marginal K rate and high BAA

2002, 216IP, mediocre season with the 4.15ERA and marginal K rate

2001, 151IP, mediocre season, missed most of August and Sept.

 

See the point? He was a workhorse. 3 straight 200IP seasons, but since his CY candidate season, he hasnt put a full yr together. The only yr out of the past 4 that he was with the brewers for the entire stretch run was 2006. So me saying that he wont be around for the stretch is not BS. He's missed significant time late in the yr 3 of the last 4 seasons.

[CrespoBlows]

Sheets history

 

2008, 198IP, dominant in year, but misses stretch run and post season with a torn muscle

2007, 141IP, dominant in year, but misses significant time in July, August, and Sept as the Brewers sunk into mediocrity

2006, 106IP, pretty solid when playing, misses May, June and most of July, but finishes the yr strong in Sept as Brewers miss playoffs

2005, 156IP, dominant in yr, misses most of May and all of Sept

2004, 237IP, dominant, CY candidate

2003, 220IP, mediocre season with the 4.45ERA, marginal K rate and high BAA

2002, 216IP, mediocre season with the 4.15ERA and marginal K rate

2001, 151IP, mediocre season, missed most of August and Sept.

 

See the point? He was a workhorse. 3 straight 200IP seasons, but since his CY candidate season, he hasnt put a full yr together. The only yr out of the past 4 that he was with the brewers for the entire stretch run was 2006. So me saying that he wont be around for the stretch is not BS. He's missed significant time late in the yr 3 of the last 4 seasons.

 

No, your point was that Sheets and Rasner, with the ERA's you magically came up with, would be less valuable than Derek Lowe, with the ERA you magically came up with. When pointed out that your math was incorrect, you said that Rasner would pitch in the postseason.

 

Logic fail.

[jacksonianmarch]

My point was that you would need to have a 6th starter just for Sheets and my second point was that he seems to wear down as the season goes on. Sounds logical to me. Listen, if Sheets were healthy, I'd be all about getting him. But he has proven time and time again that he wears down as the season progresses.

[CrespoBlows]

My point was that you would need to have a 6th starter just for Sheets and my second point was that he seems to wear down as the season goes on. Sounds logical to me. Listen' date=' if Sheets were healthy, I'd be all about getting him. But he has proven time and time again that he wears down as the season progresses.[/quote']

 

57 + 42 > 105 ?

[jacksonianmarch]

I see what you are saying

[Gom]

so what about the 2 yrs prior where he was solid. Fact is' date=' he's been a starter for 7 yrs now, 3 in the AL, 4 in the NL. In only one of those yrs was he bad and it was 4 yrs ago. But you choose to harp on that yr in predicting how good he's be. That is moronic[/quote']

His last two years in the AL were 4.47 ERA and 5.42 ERA. He was also younger and threw harder.

 

You're looking to sign a Boras client who pitched in one of the biggest pitcher parks in the National League in one of the weakest hitting divisions in baseball in his contract year. At the age of 36 next season. I'm looking for value. The way I see it, the Yankees can afford 2, maybe 3 impact players this off-season. Lowe does not have the pedigree of an impact pitcher. Would you feel confident putting him in a short series against Dice-K, Lester, or Beckett? Lowe is not a bad pitcher, he would just be bad value.

 

Enough. I honestly had thought different, but you know nothing about this game.

 

P.S. Red Sox fans...now you know why I post here more than on Yankee boards. They are filled with ignorance like what Jacko has been spewing.

[TheKilo]

Sorry Jacko. The guy had a 5.42 ERA in the AL East when he was in his early 30's. He goes out to LA, in the weakest hitting division in baseball AND in a pitchers park and has an ERA in the high 3's. Remember Kevin Brown? Randy Johnson?

 

Any pitcher from the NL, specifically the NL West, is a huge risk. Will he give you innings? Sure. Will they be quality innings? No.

 

Money better allocated elsewhere. I'm not surprised that this idiot GM is going after him, nor that you support the move.

 

Gom = voice of reason

 

Can't believe I'm saying that.

[kreinbihl34]

My point was that you would need to have a 6th starter just for Sheets and my second point was that he seems to wear down as the season goes on. Sounds logical to me. Listen' date=' if Sheets were healthy, I'd be all about getting him. But he has proven time and time again that he wears down as the season progresses.[/quote']

 

Then why don't you rest him during the summer and pitch your awesome youngsters, Kennedy and Hughes?

[ARod2212]

I'd rather have Pettitte than Lowe. Pettitte had a crazy down year, but has a lot more going for him than Lowe for the Yankees. And I'm not 100% on bringing Pettitte back.

 

Stay away from Lowe. At this point I'm most interested in Burnett. CC's poor playoff performance (again) scared me off. I'd be happy with Burnett, Wang, Mussina, Joba, Pettitte/Hughes.

[jacksonianmarch]

Harping on CC in the playoffs is dumb. He was money in every must win game down the stretch, which were pretty much playoff games. I think the workload had more to do with it. When you throw 508IP over 2 seasons, 494 of that in the regular season and you have one tired horse. If we had him, I would guarantee that he throws no more than 210.

[ARod2212]

Harping on CC in the playoffs is dumb. He was money in every must win game down the stretch' date=' which were pretty much playoff games. I think the workload had more to do with it. When you throw 508IP over 2 seasons, 494 of that in the regular season and you have one tired horse. If we had him, I would guarantee that he throws no more than 210.[/quote']

Those 508 innings aren't going away. Stuff like that makes me wary.

 

And let's face it. Some guys play well in the postseason, some don't. So far, Sabathia has been decidedly in the "don't" category. Things change, but I can't ignore that factor. We've had tons of great regular season teams recently. I want a great postseason team. I don't know if Sabathia is part of that type of team.

[jacksonianmarch]

You gotta make the post season, A. B, Sabathia was playing "playoff" games on 3 days rest just to get to October. You cannot take a guy like Sabathia who was solid at the 190 mark and bring him to 250 2 yrs in a row and expect him to be fresh come the post season. And this yr, he was once again on 3 days rest when his start came about. I think CC will be much better if he is handled appropriately. I also think that he's worth the money if his MRI is clean and his physical is normal. His arm has never been the trouble. its the size

[ARod2212]

You gotta make the post season' date=' A. B, Sabathia was playing "playoff" games on 3 days rest just to get to October. You cannot take a guy like Sabathia who was solid at the 190 mark and bring him to 250 2 yrs in a row and expect him to be fresh come the post season. And this yr, he was once again on 3 days rest when his start came about. I think CC will be much better if he is handled appropriately. I also think that he's worth the money if his MRI is clean and his physical is normal. His arm has never been the trouble. its the size[/quote']

I'm not saying Sabathia won't help them make the playoffs. A-Rod does that too. But once we're there, he doesn't seem like a bankable guy. Those games on 3-days rest were great, but who was he facing? Crappy NL Central teams and a coasting Cubs team. Chips on the line against a legit lineup, he didn't get it done again. I'm still not sure if I want to invest a ton of money into that. We're going to have to beat the Angels, Rays, or Sox in the playoffs in the next few years, that's no joke NL lineup.

[Mr Crunchy]

i would be carefull with cc,in fact due to his girth and abuse by milwaukee this summer i would tread very lightly with him..

as a sox fan he doesnt frighten me in the least going to the yankees

same with sheets,this **** shut down again under the brite lights and stress of a possible post season run,will he ever be able to pitch when it matters?

look for carl pavano to sneak under the wire and land somewhere on the cheap and then watch him win 15 games in the american league,18 with a team like the dodgers or the dbax.

dont laff

didnt he win more games in his last month in pinstripes than he did in the 3 & 5/6 prior years in the bronx?

hes now ready to fullfill his life long dream of pitching for the yankees too bad cashman would get fired if he dared mention resigning him.

god i love carl pavano

one of the biggest tools of human amusement ive had in my life.