The Yankees can find nearly a half-billion dollars to pay three players who, as brilliant as they've performed elsewhere, have yet to do a thing for this franchise. And yet they can't scrape up a nickel more than $10 million for Andy Pettitte, who played an instrumental role in bringing them four world championships?
What disloyalty! What ingratitude! What heartlessness!
And what a break for the Mets. That is, if they are smart enough to recognize it.
It doesn't appear to me that any of those guys is a better fit for the Mets' rotation than Pettitte. Unlike Perez, you absolutely know what you're getting: 30 to 35 starts a year, 200-plus innings, a minimum 14 wins. If you make it to October, you have a starter guaranteed not to rattle under pressure, and almost always guaranteed to put you in a position to win.Yes I know, Pettitte had a bad final two months in '08. But that hardly means he's done as a pitcher. A lot of very good pitchers - including Pettitte several times in his career - have had bad two month stretches throughout their careers.
Plus, it would be a tremendous PR coup for the Mets, who frankly have looked like jerks the past few years watching the Yankees rescue their castoffs (Gooden, Strawberry, Cone, Nady) but now have the opportunity to return the favor.
And best of all, Pettitte doesn't cost you all that much, in money or years. One year at $12 million to $14 million, maybe with an option, probably gets it done, and that's perfect. No long-term entanglements with a head case like Perez, or a hospital case like Sheets. No five-innings-and-out, at best, like you'd get from Pedro.
What you get is a low-maintenance, no-drama professional who's here for one reason only: To help you win now, this year, not promise you things down the road that he will likely never deliver.
The Yankees can't find a few more bucks in their otherwise limitless vault for a guy like that? Fine.
Between all the valid points Matthews makes, and the fine point Peter Abraham makes here about the Yankees lack of pitching depth compared to the Red Sox, there really is no reason not to resign Pettitte, even if they have to sweeten the pot a bit. Why the Yankees didn't just offer him $12-$13 million earlier in the offseason (like I suggested) still leaves me scratching my head.
Also, we fans have to get over Andy holding out for more money. It angers me too, but we all have to realize that baseball is a business, this isn't anything new.
I know people want to see Phil Hughes, Ian Kennedy, and/or Alfredo Aceves, but can they give the Yankees what Andy Pettitte can? The answer is probably not. The Yankees could also make a run at Freddy Garcia, and that may solve this problem, but he's coming off major arm surgery, so there are no guarantees on how he'll hold up over 162 games.
Of all the other options I'd still rather see them go with Pettitte. He's not only a very solid number 5, but he's also a leader in the clubhouse.
And seriously, do you want to see him pitching for the Mets?
12 Comments:
If Derek Lowe is worth a 4-year-60M deal, you can't convince me Andy is but a 10M pitcher.
Pettitte's WHIP and ERA+ over the last three seasons:
1.43/106
1.42/110
1.41/98
W/L: 43-36
So we're going to give $12M-$14M to a guy with a 1.4+ WHIP for three straight seasons, who's only 7 games over .500 in three years combined? Pass. $10M, take it or leave it.
Peter Abraham's argument doesn't make sense. You don't do something on your team just because the Red Sox have 5 rehab cases waiting in line for the 5th starting spot. You make a deal if it makes sense, and anything more than $10M doesn't make sense for a guy that's his age, with his numbers, and his shoulder question mark.
The only thing that worries me the fact that Joba is on an innings count, had arm issues last year, CC is coming off of 250 innings, and AJ has always had injury concerns. Eventually you're going to need another guy in there, but honestly, Aceves, Huges, and probably about 3-4 other guys in our system could fill with Pettitte numbers, and quite easily.
Raven- You're right. Lowe isn't worth that much. But it's not a reason to overpay for Pettitte who's been average-to-below-average for three years now. And while you may not think he's worth more than Pettitte, he's a year younger, and here are his last 3 years WHIP/ERA+:
1.27/124
1.27/118
1.13/131
Granted all three of those are in the NL while Pettitte's last two are in the AL East, but that's why ERA+ is used to compare to league averages, so it helps compensate a bit.
It's easy to see why Lowe has been paid more, and additionally he doesn't have the arm concerns that Pettitte might have at this point. His numbers down the stretch may have been so awful for the very reason taht there's somehting wrong with the shoulder, and who knows if it will just go away. It could likely crop up again down the stretch when we need him most.
I'd rather gamble with the 5th spot than give in to Pettitte and pay $14M for him.
And while we're on the topic:
Abraham says: "It’s not acceptable for a contending team to go into the season with four good starters and hold a contest for the fifth spot."
Name me a contending team at this moment that has a definite, dependable 5th starter. It's "not acceptable?" Well, acceptable or not, I can't think of too many teams right now that would have very much faith in their 5th starter. Boston's 5th right now is probably Penny, and I might be better than that guy. Maybe Buchholz? I don't know. Either way, it's nobody reliable. Same goes for Tampa Bay, the Angels, Mets, Dodgers, you name it. 5th starter jobs are up for grabs on almost every team out there. And if the role isn't up for grabs, there's a very real chance that the 5th starter on that team will be out of the rotation by mid-season.
Depth doesn't always equate to quality. Sure, Boston has potential 5th starters or replacement starters with Smoltz, Penny, Buchholz, and Masterson. But are any of those names any more of a sure thing than what the Yankees have? I know Hughes hasn't instilled us with a lot of confidence, but I honestly think that given a full season, he's as likely to match what any of those four can do as anyone else. Aceves could likely be a servicable 5th starter with a league average ERA.
Penny has a career 5+ ERA vs. the AL. Smoltz 4.2+. And he's 42. And he just had shoulder surgery. And he's coming to the AL (and Fenway Park, no less) from a career in the NL.
This concept that you must have an all star 1 though 5 in your rotation doesn't make sense. Your 5th starter isn't even used necessarily every time through the rotation. While it might be a nice bonus to have a 200 inning guy around, I don't think Pettitte is the answer any more, especially not with the way he's treating the Yankees.
If the Mets want him for $14M with options or incentives, let him go. I'd rather look elsewhere, whether or not that means using someone or a mix of someones we already have.
And let me once again make my case for Garland. At this point, with several second tier players on the market, it's not unthinkable that Garland gets a 2 year deal for around $12M-$14M. If that's possible, I'd jump on it. Here's why:
Garland had a bad year last year. There's really no way around it. 1.5 WHIP, 4.9 ERA, but a respectable 14-8 record, although I don't put a ton of stock in W/L, I do think it's worth mentioning.
Here are Garland's last 4 seasons, including his bad year last year:
(WHIP/ERA+)
05: 1.17/128
06: 1.36/105
07: 1.32/112
08: 1.51/91
His career WHIP is 1.39 (better than each of the three previous seasons from Pettitte). His combined W/L for the last 3 years is 42-28. Considerably better than Pettitte, but again, W/L only tells you so much.
So anyway, it's quite easily arguable that Garland's poor showing in 08 was an outlier. It was clearly his worst season, and he's been a rather reliable workhorse every season with a WHIP under 1.4 most of the time, and 32 starts or more for 8 straight seasons, and 190 innings or more for 7 straight. He doesn't walk a lot of batters, and doesn't make his own trouble. Additionally, he only just turned 29.
You could argue that at 29, he's likely at the very worst due for a career average year, as he's at that age where you expect such. Additionally, he pitched extremely well against the AL East last year.
If Pettitte won't accept a one year, $10M deal, I would much rather have Garland on a 1 or 2 year deal than give Pettitte what he's looking for. Garland, at his age and stage of his career is more dependable in terms of innings and starts, and aside from last season's underwhelming performance, should give you a lot of quality starts as your #5, allowing Hughes, Aceves, Coke, Kennedy to develop some more and step in should anyone not be able to go.
I'm not suggesting he's ideal, but at the same time he'd be good for 200 innings, 32+ starts, and what in my prediction would be an ERA around 4.3-4.5, and honestly I don't think you could expect more from Pettitte.
You just never know, and maybe something with Eiland clicks and you get another outstanding year from Garland like the one he had in '05.
In the end, however, I'm perfectly comfortable with going into the spring with a competition for the 5th spot.
I can't tell if this Wallace Matthews douchebag is being tongue-in-cheek about the Yankees not offering Andy Pettitte more than TEN MILLION DOLLARS FOR ONE YEAR, or if he's serious and he's putting a spin on it like a puppet.
Because if he wants to talk about disloyalty, ingratitude, and heartlessness, he should ask himself why this good ol' Christian with strong moral values is too proud to accept $10M/1yr.
How many sins can Andy perpetrate in one career?
Pride, Greed, Wrath... what's next?
Isn't he afraid of going to hell?
lol
$10million and he's insulted. These guys are so out of touch its unbelievable.
Pinstripes... I liked your first post... but definitely not the second... Garland is no good.
I think we're under estimating Phil Hughes. I think he just had an off year last year, and I really think he has what it takes to be the number 5 pitcher this year.
I'd still love to have Pettitte, don't get me wrong, and I know that Hughes would make it into the rotation at some point - after all someone, probably Burnett, will get injured.
I think we're putting too much faith in Hughes. Last we did the same and it bit us in the ass.
Trevor,
Look, I hope Phil Hughes becomes great, and eventually I think he can. But for 2009 I think Andy Pettitte gives the Yankees a little more than either Hughes, Aceves, Kennedy, or Coke. I also think that unless they sign some other reliever, the Yankees should keep Coke in the pen.
Pinstripes,
The Yankees need an innings eater, and that's what Pettitte is. Garland might be a decent backup option, but I'm not so sure about that.
Anon,
As for the money, the Yanks overpayed for A-Rod, Mo, and Posada last year, not only in money but in years. They did the same this year with Sabathia, Burnett, and Teixeira. So to hold back on Andy Pettitte for $2-3 is silly. Especially when you only have to sign him for one year. If we were talking about a two or three year deal, I'd stay far far away.
And another thing; don't underestimate the importance of real pitching depth.
The Yankees went into last season thinking they had too many pitchers. Sidney Ponson and Darrell Rasner later they realized they did not. The Red Sox have 9 potential major leaguers is not something to scoff at. Yes, there are question marks, but the Yankees back of the rotation has more.
Sign Jon Garland for 1 year 7-8 million
I just don't care about Pettitte at all these days. If he pitches for someone else, it'll be neat when our guys belt home runs off him.
If he comes back, fine; if he leaves, fine. I just don't care.
Mike
Anon,
If they could do that, then fine. But I doubt he's going to sign a one-year deal. However, that's not really based on anything but his age.
Post a Comment