YankeesRedSox.com

We have a veteran on the squad already with a proven track record. Kei Igawa. Just kidding, we're screwed if he bails.

That about sums it up Tim.

The Yankees do not have a number one starter even with Pettite. Wang really struggled at times last year. Hopefully he can put it all together, but I'm dubious. Pettite has age and health issues, but he is as close as they get to a number 1 guy and the Yanks have to sign him.

Don't expect Hughes and Kennedy to pitch like Mel Stottlemyre. Even Guidry struggled to find his way. These young pitchers need a few years. And expect nothing from Mussina, who looks about done unless he wises up and starts throwing the knuckler like Tim Wakefield.

As for Chamberlain, I suppose there is a remote chance that he would be able to be a starter and pitch like a number one guy. I always thought the Yanks made a big mistake shifting Righetti to the bullpen. A good starter is more important than any bullpen guy.

Anyway, they've got nothing to lose because they don't look like a playoff team to me. So they should try out Chamberlain as a starter in 2008 and hope he proves to be the number 1 guy they've been looking for.

Corey,

Agreed. Pettite is the closest thing they have to a No. 1 guy, but as you say, he is not a dominating ace. Wang has been very good, at times, but by no means is he "lights out". To have sustainable success, they need Chamberlain or Hughes to step up and assume that role. I don't trust sinkerballers trying to fill that role. Wang makes a fine #2 guy, and I like him a great deal. But even before the ALDS, I have always been a little nervous in a big game when he starts.

I was shocked when the Yankees signed Mussina to his current contract. Sure, 2005 was in many ways a pleasant surprise, but anybody could see he was well into his decline phase. What were the Yankees thinking, giving him such a big contract? And for two years, no less. I understand they they didn't really have a lot of options, especially having decided that they wanted Hughes to start at AAA, but I have to believe they could have signed him for less. Who else was willing to throw that kind of money at him?

Chamberlain should be a starter, if everything I've read/heard is true. Too many quality pitches to waste him as a reliever. Of course, that leaves the Yankees in a familiar position: having to build a bullpen. Assuming they re-sign Mo and Posada, I see that as their #1 priority, even more important than trying to find someone for 3B. I am hoping that Bruney will help, but that may be asking too much. Too may walks, and still somewhat immature.

It's a shame about Righetti. The Yanks erred by moving him into the bullpen, and I don't think the organization and the fans have ever really appreciated the sacrifice he made for the team. Now he's part of the Giants organization and it seems no one misses him, no one cares that he's gone. That bothers me. He was a good teammate and a good guy.

I said it last year and I will repeat it, they should have simply exercised Mussina's option for $17-million and made this his final year. They saved some money, but created a problem for 2008. I would still advocate trading him if they could. I wonder if the Phillies would bite?

Peter, I thought the Yanks getting Moose for 2yrs/12mm per wasn't that bad. Given his numbers in 2006, I thought an NL team might offer him 3yrs. Glavine got 5yrs at his age.

Hindsight [your prediction], I agree with you but I don't fault the Yanks for giving him two years given that Joba was a baby and Hughes wasn't supposed to be ready yet. He was the best of a ton of poor choices, Meche & Lilly for longer obligations.

Tim- I don't think the deal was bad, but the Yankees could have simply exercised his option after 2006. It would have cost them $17-million, but they would be done with the obligation now. Mussina shouldn't have a role on the 2008 team in my opinion, even if Pettitte retires.

I suppose there is an outside shot that the Yanks can pick up Santana or Willis by trading some of their most coveted prospects.

I'm a bit uncertain about Willis, but the Yanks can drive a better bargain with the Marlins than they can with the Twins. The Twins will clean out the Yankees in return for Santana.

Although Santana was not quite as dominant last year as he has been before, he has a great work ethic and as a lefty would be perfect at the Stadium. I don't think the Twins will let him go.

So I'm resigned to another year of uncertain pitching, but with the redeeming feature that the Yanks are at least using some exciting new homegrown talent with a very large upside.

The good thing about A-Rod's departure is you free up salary to replace him with 2 great players. A-Rod is the best player in the game, but I'd rather have two excellent players than one great one. Let's say they use Boras' idiotic $35 million/year to pick up both Tejeda and Cabrera. Put Tejada at third and move Cabrera to first. That is a better infield than last year even though you are losing the best player in baseball.

Corey-

Willis worries me after this past year and I think you are absolutely right about Santana. I would rather see what we have in Hughes and Joba before overpaying anyone for another starter. Both these guys are young, have a lot of potential and are cheap. I don't see how you can give that up right now.

Have you seen Heyman's article on Santana? You can view it at: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/jon_heyman/11/08/santana.trade/index.html

Curious: How much would you give up for Santana? One of the Big Three? Two? None at all? I believe the Twins would demand at least two of them. And of course, it would take a lot to get him to agree to pass on free agency and sign a contract extension. Perhaps as much as 5 years/$150 million. How much is too much? Five years is a long time to sign a pitcher - any pitcher - especially for that kind of money. Since I'm asking, I'll throw some ideas out, just to get the conversation started. My ground rules would be:

1. I wouldn't give up more than one of the Big Three;

2. Chamberlain is absolutely untouchable - no exceptions;

3. We can throw in Melky Cabrera - they're going to be needing a CF, after all. I like Cabrera, but he doesn't hit well enough to be untouchable;

4. I would swallow really hard and extend Santana's contract up to 5 years/$150 million, i.e., no more than 5 years, no more than $30 million/year. Those would be my upper limits. I generally dislike giving out contracts longer than four years to pitchers because I feel they're too fragile. That being said, Santana is obviously very, very special. Even though Beckett had a better season, Santana is still the pitcher I'd start with if I were building a team from scratch. Especially at Yankee Stadium, where having a killer southpaw on your staff is a huge advantage.

I'm under no illusions, though: Hughes + Cabrera isn't going to cut it for Minnesota. Your thoughts?

Greg

Steve Goldman had an interesting take on this over at YES http://web.yesnetwork.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20071105&content_id=1433355&oid=36019&vkey=6

I think Santana is wonderful, but that contract scares me. I totally agree with your first three points, but I couldn't do that contract. 5 years/$100 million would be my absolute max and I would give him the same vesting option that Zambrano got from the Cubs for a sixth year. That way he is still the highest paid pitcher in the game.

As for the package, I would imagine Kennedy, Cabrera and Horne would get things started and you would probably need to throw something else in. But, a rotation of Santana folowed by Wang, Hughes, Joba and Mussina should be able to go toe-to-toe with anyone. I just don't know if the Twins are going to trade him now.

From Minnesota's perspective, Liriano should be back and while you lose Hunter, you have the "M+M" boys. Nathan is still there and you have a new stadium on the horizon. Why make a deal now when you could wait until mid-season and see where you are in the standings?

Peter,

Goldman's view that Santana just might be an arm injury waiting to happen is interesting. Taking into account Goldman's observations makes it just that little bit harder for me to accept spending $30 million/year on him. Probably even tilts the scales for me against it. Come to think of it, Cleveland did beat him 5 times in 2007. I do think that if he simply manages to put up roughly the same numbers in 2008 for the Twins as he did in 2007, then someone -- the Yanks, the Red Sox, the Angels, the Mets, maybe the Dodgers -- will give him that kind of money. And perhaps live to regret it.

I agree with you that Minnesota's best move is to wait until the July deadline. If Minnesota is still in it at that time, and especially if Liriano has sufficiently recovered, then they should go for it. A rotation including Santana and Liriano each near or at the top of his game would be scary good in the playoffs. Easily the best 1-2 punch since Johnson/Schilling in 2001. If, on the other hand, Minnesota is out of it they can possibly still get a very good deal for Santana, as he has the potential to be a huge difference-maker. It will come down to the neogtiating skills of Minnesota's front office (and the buyer's ability to satisfy Santana with a contract extension). So much is riding on Liriano's recovery in 2008 for Minnesota. Possibly the difference between a world championship and not making the playoffs. It's going to be a very compelling story.