 |
|
|
| |
« More From Rosenthal: Bay, A's, Mets, Rays | Main | More From Stark: Mets, Dodgers, Indians »
Washburn To Yankees Close To Done-Deal
6:15pm: Ken Rosenthal just reported during the Fox telecast that the deal is now being held up by the Mariners demand for a top prospect in addition to the Yankees taking the remainder of Washburn's contract.
5:53pm: Gregor Chisholm is now reporting that Washburn is still listed as the Mariners starting pitcher for Sunday.
5:04pm: Jon Heyman is also saying that the deal could be done in the next couple of days. He also notes that any compensation for Washburn would not be in the form of an extension from the Yankees.
4:52pm: Peter Abraham is now reporting that the deal could happen as early as tomorrow and that the Yankees are willing to pay all of the salary remaining on the contract "in return for not sending Seattle any player of significance. No, not Kei Igawa." Abraham also feels that any compensation would come from Seattle.
4:31pm: Geoff Baker of the Seattle Times spoke with Washburn following today's game and Washburn gave no indication that a deal was done, or even imminent. Washburn did make it clear that he will seek some form of compensation in return for waiving his no-trade clause.
Buster Olney is reporting that the oft-talked about deal in which the Mariners would send Jarrod Washburn to the Yankees, will likely be completed in the next 48 hours. Olney suggests that the move is a salary dump with $13-14MM still owed to Washburn ($3-4MM in '08, $10.35MM in '09). If the Yankees take on most or all of the remaining contract, do not look for any big names to be going back in the other direction.
I spoke with Peter Abraham of the Journal-News and he reiterated that Brian Cashman is saying that the deal is not done yet.
Cork Gaines writes for RaysIndex.com and can be reached here.
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b9a69e200e553d790a78834
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Washburn To Yankees Close To Done-Deal:
Comments
Verify your Comment
Previewing your Comment
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
Top Stories
Search MLBTR
MLBTR Features
Recent Posts
Rumors By Team
Monthly Archives
Live Chats
Tuesdays at 2 p.m. CST
Wilson is on course for .280/.380/.550, 40 HR, 120 RBI, if they were to play 160 games. He's 24 by MLB standards, it goes by when your birthday is, in relation to Opening Day. So when you say a guy is 19, if he turns 20 a day after Opening Day, he's still 19 by MLB standards. If you are going to bring up age then you are automatically linkng this conversation to the conversation about acceptable time periods for ascending to the major leagues, and at 24 years old, he's still go two more years of being a prospect... The main reason he's at AA is because they feel he's still a year away from playing in the majors and they are keeping MLB cuspers and ready players in Tacoma in case they are needed, hense Diaz, Jimerson, Saunders, Balentien, etc. As for the Wilson thing, he had an off year last year, but that's because they converted him to purely a right-handed hitter instead of batting switch and in doing so he had to change his approach since he wasn't used to facing righties as a right-handed hitter. Now that he's comfortable again at the plate he's ready to move back into our Top 10 prospects list. I would be surprised if he wasn't on the 40 man roster right after the season ends and on the 25 man roster next April!
Posted by: BaseballGuru | July 26, 2008 at 08:45 PM
First off his sinker has NOTHING to do with how hard the ball is hit, it's the way in which the ball hits the bat and the spin that occurs after contact, but good guess Bill Nye! How about your Yankee blinders... The fact is that Wang also benefitted from beating up on lowly Tampa Bay, Baltimore, and Toronto teams... Only last year did Tampa Bay really start having an offense that was notable. Texas has routinely had one of the best offenses in the league, there is no hitters park like Arlington in the NL East division. Also Oakland until this year had some pretty good offenses, like Piazza, Thomas, Cust, Chavez, etc. So throw out the Safeco/L.A. stadiums crap... The fact is that Yankee stadium is considered by most experts to be a pitchers park. Not to the extent that Anaheim or Safeco Field is, but that benefits Wang a lot. Sure he throws sinkers, good for him, that means he's not as likely to give up homeruns, but he's also not able to pitch himself out of trouble when everyone starts hitting balls that can't be grabbed by his fielders... There's no such thing as superior pitching style... It's what do you do day in-day out... Wang is a better pitcher in my opinion, but to say that there is any great measure of distance between them is crazy... I'm just making the point that people are acting like Washburn is like Jeff Weaver and that Wang is some demi-God of baseball like the second coming of Bob Gipson or some crap...
Posted by: BaseballGuru | July 26, 2008 at 08:53 PM
Alright, so now Wilson's numbers at AA count because he is only 24 by MLB standards, but Jed Lowrie's .297/.410/.501 line at AA didn't count because he was already 23 at the time? Seriously man, you may be the biggest homer I've ever talked to.
Posted by: nixa37 | July 26, 2008 at 08:55 PM
Guru, can you please talk about something else. I think you are saying the same in thing in every one of your posts.
You've listed so many prospects in the Minors, but please, most of them will never be great players in the bigs.
All you've done is shown us stats, but in reality, there is so much more you have to know about a player.
Posted by: Sal from Tampa | July 26, 2008 at 08:55 PM
So you're saying that GB/FB as a stat is worthless because you can't count on fielders to get to GBs? Weak contact GBs are, at best, singles. FBs to the outfield, yeah you'll get some fly outs but you also get 2Bs, 3Bs, HRs, and that shows in a comparison of Wang and Washburn's stats. Maybe you can nickel and dime Wang to death, but you can quarter and half dollar Washburn, and I'd much rather have the former.
Posted by: McGrifftheCrimeDog | July 26, 2008 at 08:57 PM
Just to clarify about your Pujols statement... I believe he also has Glaus who's on course for 30 HR, an all-star in Ryan Ludwick, raking like a young Jim Edmonds, and Rick Ankiel who's on course for 30+ HR, and all these guys bat around him... Ludwick, Ankiel, and Glaus for protection with TWO of them batting after you, makes it a little hard to get a ton of free passes, but look at Bonds and what happened when he was on a team with no real threat behind him... I'm not saying Halman will be Bonds as my IBB total would be well over 100 shy of expectations, but my point is that I don't see Seattle every having a lineup like the mid to late 90s with A-Rod, Griffey, Edgar, and Buhner. Chances are he'll be in a lineup like the one they field now, where there are a couple 25-30 HR guys there and the rest are 10-15 HR, contact hitters... Chances are he'll be one of the 25-30 HR guys and most teams have a solid 3-4-5, so there's not a chance to do a ton of IBB, but I'm projecting based off my team, isn't that the way you project, to go off of facts and realistic expectations?! Hell, Ichiro has 9 right now and has only one MLB season where he's hit more HRs than he had IBB.
Posted by: BaseballGuru | July 26, 2008 at 09:05 PM
My Yankee's blinders dude? I'm from Atlanta and there is no baseball team I hate more than the Yankees. The thing is though, I hate arrogant ignorance way more than I hate the Yankees.
And yes, throwing a good sinker does make it far less likely that you will give up XBHs. The reason is that you get way more GBs and very few GBs turn into XBHs.
Since you decided to bring science into the discussion, something you obviously know nothing about, I'll try and explain it. Since a sinker is moving down quicker than a traditional fastball, it takes more angled plane through the strike zone. To have the maximum chance of solid contact with the baseball, you want to match your swing plane to that which the ball is traveling. The fact that a sinker is traveling a more extreme plane means this matching process is harder to perform and any mistake is magnified to a greater degree. See what you can do when you actually study this stuff and don't just spout off crap you don't understand.
By the way, when I say superior pitching style, I mean that Wang is better than Washburn at limiting BABIP and opponents slugging percentage. This allows him to post far better numbers than Washburn despite similar peripheral numbers. You can call it whatever you want, but Wang is obviously better at it than Washburn.
Posted by: nixa37 | July 26, 2008 at 09:08 PM
The Yankees will sign Washburn and will give up a prospect, and Igawa
Posted by: YANKEESRTHEBEST | July 26, 2008 at 09:10 PM
Igawa is worth nothing to the Yankees.
Posted by: YANKEESRTHEBEST | July 26, 2008 at 09:11 PM
Keep digging that hole buddy. Mind explaining why Pujols only got 22 IBBs last season when the 3 guys that hit behind him most often were Edmonds (12 HR), Encarnacion (9 HR), and Scott Rolen (8 HR)?
Posted by: nixa37 | July 26, 2008 at 09:14 PM
"It's not like I compared Washburn to Clemens, I compared two soft tossers that play to contact, where the ball goes after that doesn't really deviate from my assessments, sure there are differences, that's not my point... If you want to get technical, the junk strikeout ratio Wash has is way better than Wang's, but Wang gets more DPs with his style of pitching. "
Wang, a soft tosser? D00d sits 94-96. Nice try, again.
As to "My point is Wang and Washburn are not Josh Beckett and Felix Hernandez types that can take over a game, they need a good defense and a little luck. So the comparison is not far fetched, they are exactly the same, but they aren't exactly on opposite sides of the spectrum either, and if you can't see that then who really has the skewed perspective?!"
Again, not completely correct. True, Wang ain't a Beckett/Felix/Clemens type, but the d00d can absolutely dominate a game when he's on. The sinker is his go to pitch, but he was flashing his 4 seamer and sinker earlier this season (before his mechanics problems).
Posted by: V | July 26, 2008 at 09:17 PM
94-96 my ass... The highest average fastball is Felix Hernandez at like 95.8, which is 2 below where he tops out unless he's over throwing. Wang's fastball is listed at 90, that's 92mph max speed. I've NEVER seen Wang hit 93 or higher in a game, EVER!! Also, 94 or higher is bringing it... 93 can still be a power pitcher depending, but 92 and less is considered a finesse pitcher, especially right-handed pitchers because so many throw 93 or faster as righties...
Posted by: BaseballGuru | July 26, 2008 at 09:39 PM
Wang's sinker can hit 93. Though I guess if every poster on this site says guru is an idiot but guru says theyre wrong, he must be right
Posted by: LetsGoOs | July 26, 2008 at 09:42 PM
Here's a wild guess... Maybe it had something to do with pitchers going off ability of the players and their history rather than their psychic ability to predict a major drop off in production for the months that followed...
Even if halfway through the season they figured out that the other guys weren't performing, this would explain why Pujols is going to have 30-35 IBB this year and last year was only 2/3 of that total?! He'll probably have more than that in September as pennant season causes pitchers to work around guys more and games count for more...
Third explanation, Eckstein and Duncan batting in front of them accumulated for the season 243 trips ending at 1B after a plate appearance, either by single or walk... That was 80% of their total times getting on base, meaning that in any instance where the inning was continued and there was a person on base, more likely than not 1st base was occupied, limiting his chances to get intentionally walked. The reason Bonds had 120 IBB that one season was because the guys in front of him were never on 1st, so he always was walked...
Posted by: BaseballGuru | July 26, 2008 at 09:49 PM
I would say Wang sits 92-93 throughout the game..
Ive seen him hit 95-96 at times
Posted by: Brewer818 | July 26, 2008 at 09:49 PM
Which gun are you using?! There's a 2 mph difference and the slower one is the accurate one, by the way, that's the one used at Safeco Field and displayed on the television for our telecasts in the NW, NEVER has he hit 93 with his pitches... Not once in all the games I watch!
Posted by: BaseballGuru | July 26, 2008 at 09:55 PM
Ive seen numerous reading of 94-96 on Fox, on YES network, etc for WAng
Posted by: Brewer818 | July 26, 2008 at 10:02 PM
Oh you must not be able to be bothered by that detail since you already knew about the descrepency, right?! Oh and where did you see his mph, since I KNOW that Yankees broadcasts don't show velocity, it's maybe commented on by the broadcaster, but it's not actively displayed on the screen!
Posted by: BaseballGuru | July 26, 2008 at 10:03 PM
Wow, I was glancing through all of the comments and I noticed that Guru is actually a Red's fan too. So Guru, you can admit it now that you are actually ctownboy too.
Posted by: AFROTC Cadet | July 26, 2008 at 10:03 PM
If he threw a sinker at 93 and a fastball at 95-96, he'd strikeout a helluva lot more than 1 batter ever 2+ IP. I'm not buying it, my eyes haven't seen it, and the stats don't support it... I've never seen a guy with a fastball and a heavy sinker that didn't get atleast 2 SO:3 IP as a ratio.
Posted by: BaseballGuru | July 26, 2008 at 10:05 PM
Damn TypeKey, with a high velocity fastball and a heavy sinker...
Posted by: BaseballGuru | July 26, 2008 at 10:05 PM
Guru, can you just stop talking please. YES Network does show MPH.
Stop giving us all this bullshit, stats, and projections.
Ask anyone on Earth who a better pitcher, Wang or Washburn.
99 out of 100 people will say Wang is.
Just like on this page. Probably a 99 people on hear say Wang is the greater pitcher.
And you are the ONE IDIOT to to disagree with everyone.
How can you say Washburn is better?
Wang is better, no questions. Go to bed and get back to your senses, you've been at this all day.
Wang > Washburn
ENDO CONVO
Posted by: Sal from Tampa | July 26, 2008 at 10:10 PM
Wang's pitch f/x:
http://baseball.bornbybits.com/plots/Chien-Ming_Wang.html
He throws his sinker at an average initial pitch speed of 94.08 mph.
Posted by: stove611 | July 26, 2008 at 10:51 PM
Guru- is your staunch support of M's prospects just a pathetic defense in knowing that your team and franchise are pathetic?
Posted by: themfightnwords | July 26, 2008 at 10:52 PM
Wow, this BaseballGuru d00d really is an idiot.
Posted by: V | July 26, 2008 at 11:25 PM
BaseballGuru,
You really are an imbecile. I've been reading how you claim over and over how superior the Mariners system is to the Yankees. You really don't know a damn thing about who's in the Yankees system.
In fact, you had the nerve to write, "We are on course to have 10 or more players with 20 HR power, 4 of those guys will have 20/20 seasons in 2/3 of a MLB season (110 games). Sorry, it's really not close."
You're right, it's not close. THE YANKEES HAVE A BETTER FARM SYSTEM THAN THE MARINERS --- You just don't know who's in the Yankees system, but the OBJECTIVE rankings of the past 3 years prove the Yanks have MORE in their farm system than the lowly mariners.
In 2006, the Yanks were ranked #17 and the Mariners were #27 by Baseball America
http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/prospects/features/26854.html
In 2007, the Yanks were ranked 11th and the Mariners 19th by the Harball Times
http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/ranking-organizations/
As of March 5, 2008, baseball prospectus ranked the Yankees #6 (and noted the Yanks were #3 in 2007 by BP) and ranked the mariners BELOW #15 (the article cuts off)
There is variance in these rankings but in 2006, 2007 and 2008 the Yanks have always been ranked higher in organizational rankings than the mariners. And the mariners are ranked pretty low.
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=7204
Posted by: Jeb | July 26, 2008 at 11:39 PM
OMG, guru has finally stopped typing!
Probably has arthritis in his hands by now.
He could make a 300 page fiction novel with all of that bull sh!t.
And have Jose Canseco edit it.
Posted by: Sal from Tampa | July 27, 2008 at 12:00 AM
Hi Guys~
I just got back from dinner/movies with my chick and noticed that the flippin village idiot (aka - GURU) was STILL on here like 5-6 hours later. Besides having absolutely NO life....he may be the most clueless poster in the history of sports chat boards. Just ignore him or his ignorance and absolute stupidity will make you smack your head into the keyboard.
Go see the new Will Farrell movie, it's pretty funny.
Goodnight~
Posted by: jjyankeesfan2 | July 27, 2008 at 12:22 AM
Comparing Washburn to Wang is pure idiocy. I understand that the NY media tends to inflate the legend of NY pitchers but there's no comparison, regardless of how you twist stats. Chien Ming-Wang has been one of the best pitchers in the league for the past three years while Jarrod Washburn hasn't. There's no room to argue. Washburn is a good fourth or fifth starter while Wang is a very good one or two starter.
It's absurd to say that Washburn is equal to Wang, and anyone who says that is a fool. They're not on the same level and they'll never be on the same level unless Wang decides to pitch lefty for the next four years.
Posted by: Ol_Dirtay | July 27, 2008 at 12:31 AM
You all are idiots, honestly not one of you even knows what this is about or doesn't even comprehend the argument... The point is that Washburn is not all together different than Wang... Wang would NEVER get 15-20MM on the open market, NEVER, EVER, EVER, NEVER... Best he'll get will be from the Yankees, if they even want him... They were talking about trading him a couple years ago and couldn't get the package they wanted in return...
It's not even about Washburn being better, it's that they aren't different pitchers... Pitchers fall into these main categories flyball/groundball, strikeout/contact, high velocity/control, and most importantly, they get labeled a #1-#5. Wang would not be a #1 on 12 of the teams in the AL, only NY and Texas don't have a clear cut "better ace" than Wang.
He's a #3 or worse on 9 out of the 14 teams in the AL, which should clue you in that he's not that special... Washburn is considered a #3 not a #5. It's stupid that you all don't get that Wang isn't elite, he's not even an All-Star, he's a little above average. Hell during the Bedard to Seattle time period on here, EVERYONE that was a Yankee fan was saying how horrible Wang was, funny how that changes a few months later, and when he got injured, his ERA was starting to go up....
Posted by: BaseballGuru | July 27, 2008 at 03:40 AM
I can't believe Guru said Wang was a soft tosser. As many people already mentioned, he throws 93-94. Seriously dude, get off this site. Half this thread is comprised of your idiotic, rambling statements about how the Mariners farm system is the best ever and trumps the Yankees system in every possible way. Just please stop.
Posted by: nikhilr28 | July 27, 2008 at 04:43 AM
LMAO at Wang the soft tosser.
Yes, it is interesting he doesnt strike out more folks with the stuff he has, but he also is one of the best at inducing the DP.
That said, if we can get Washburn for Igawa and a scrub, Id be happy. He is going to be more reliable than Rasner.
But to call them equal....LOL
Posted by: Jobaman | July 27, 2008 at 06:40 AM
hey im a sox fan and if the yanks want to get washburn thats the best bews ive heard for the sox all year. RED SOX OWNNN HIM. ik you yankees are desperate for pitching but you can do alot better than some pitcher that just throw oil on a fire. go out and get lowe or penny but washburn is not your answer. you guys screwed yourselves when you had andy pettitte being one of your top pitchers this year
Posted by: gmac | July 27, 2008 at 07:07 AM
Nobody is counting on Washburn for an ace.
Chamberlian, Wang, Pettite, Moose, and Washburn.
I dont think Hughes does much this year if he comes back at all.
How did Pettite do last night? How is he doing this year?
Posted by: Jobaman | July 27, 2008 at 07:52 AM
"you guys screwed yourselves when you had andy pettitte being one of your top pitchers this year"
Yeah, wasn't it Andy Pettite that owned you guys yesterday. Wang is pretty much out for the year. I think Hughes could still make an impact in late August (i hope).
Posted by: yankfan1 | July 27, 2008 at 07:56 AM
*UCK WASHBURN WORST PICK UP EVER THE GUY SUCKS A D*CK
Posted by: yankeefan1988 | July 27, 2008 at 08:22 AM
Kei Igawa for washburn is really a stupid idea. Yankees should trade Kei Igawa for someone worthier.
Like Ichiro Suzuki or something.
Posted by: gurupig | July 27, 2008 at 08:34 AM
Kei Igawa is a #1 ace in Japan and washburn is definitely no way to be that. Maybe Felix Hernandez should be a better target in that trade. And Yankees can compensate for mariners with a great pitcher LaTroy Hawkins.
Posted by: gurupig | July 27, 2008 at 08:57 AM
I think that it's very telling that Baseballguru is unable to respond to my post about the objective comparisons of Yankees and Mariners farm systems.
Instead, he'll just whistle dixie and keep his thumb up his ass because he knows I'm right... Welcome to being schooled Guru!
OH and I loved all your posts the other day about how the Mariners will get Ajax and/or Kennedy for Washburn. Once we take him in a salary dump we'll see who's right.
Posted by: Jeb | July 27, 2008 at 09:21 AM
Igawa for Washburn is a dumb idea.
Is there sarcasm in your statements? You cant be that silly, and still try to be treated creditibly.
Trading a pitcher who has a very slim chance of contributing to the Yankee orgainization for someone who will be a solid back end guy is a dumb idea?
Kids....
Posted by: Jobaman | July 27, 2008 at 10:33 AM
Baseball "guru" is so stupid i was just thinking is washburn actually an improvement on sidney Ponson (2-0 w/yanks) and Darrell Rasner (who is starting to improve in wins) and he says washburn is like a wang what a douchebag
If we do get Washburn (for a B prospect) What will we do with Ian Kennedy (starting to improve in AAA) Phil Hughes, Darrel Rasner, Sidney Ponson, Carl Pavono (yea he still has a contract and is a baseball player)
Posted by: Giambi25 | July 27, 2008 at 10:59 AM
Let's go ahead and De-bunk this Washburn equals Wang nonsense too.
I imagine that someone who calls himself a "GURU" has probably heard of a gentlemen named Bill James. Mr. James developed a system to compare players called "Win Shares". I'm not going to explain the entire system, so I don't write a book (like Guru), but here are Washburn's and Wang's Win Shares from 2006 to 2007 (which are the comparable years because Wang -- a rookie in 2005 -- only pitched about half the season)
Washburn
2006 - 7 Win Shares
2007 - 10 Win Shares
Wang
2006 - 16 Win Shares
2007 - 15 win Shares
Guru, James's formula incorporates all possible statistical comparisons. Washburn and Wang are not statistically similar.
Posted by: Jeb | July 27, 2008 at 12:08 PM
Wasn't guru the one thatsaid sexson and beltre would be in the hof? You have to love him though in the face of all the mariners are facing this guy can seemingly spin the into a good orginazation. 50-50 is my favorite line over this whole thing. Projecting prospects to have 50-50 years in the majors is just about as awesome as it gets. I predict that F-mart will be a 75-75 guy in less then a year. Washburn is a fine 5 starter but wang is a legit 2 or 3 starter. I've seen him throw 96 several times.
Guru you are the man don't let anyone tell you different. They are just jealous because you are a biggr fan then they will ever be.
Posted by: joemorgan=#1 | July 27, 2008 at 12:15 PM
"However, it’s not uncommon for bad pitchers to have flukily high strand rates that significantly lower than ERAs, and vice versa. Jarrod Washburn’s 2005 ERA was almost completely due to his high strand rate, as he posted the highest LOB% in the American League. That hasn’t held true in 2006, and we’ve seen his ERA rise a full run because of it. So, when you find a pitcher who is stranding runners at an unexpected rate when compared to his talent derived by BB%, K%, and GB%, it is prudent to expect that rate to regress back towards a more normal rate in the future."
from USSM-- guru and rest of you, go read the post and maybe you will now understand why wang is so much better.
http://ussmariner.com/2006/08/29/evaluating-pitcher-talent/
Posted by: ErfanK | July 27, 2008 at 07:48 PM