Latest On Yankees’ Search For Pitching

The Yankees are in wait-and-see mode for now, but could pursue starting pitching before July 31st, Ken Rosenthal and Jon Paul Morosi of FOX Sports write. With C.C. Sabathia and Andy Pettitte on the disabled list, the Yankees’ rotation now includes Freddy Garcia and David Phelps.

Zack Greinke doesn’t interest the Yankees, who are concerned about how players will adjust to playing in New York. The Yankees could pursue Cole Hamels, but they aim to lower payroll below $189MM by 2014 to avoid the luxury tax, so keeping the left-hander long term wouldn’t be easy given the team’s existing commitments. The Yankees like Matt Garza and he may be their most realistic option if they’re willing to meet the Cubs’ steep asking price.


78 Responses to Latest On Yankees’ Search For Pitching Leave a Reply

  1. the cubs are in a total power position in regards to dealing garza. he’s under control for 2013 as well, so they will wait to be blown away by an offer for him. if that offer doesn’t come along, he’ll easily be the ace of the 2013 staff and can be traded during next season. theo knows exactly what he’s doing.  

    • G-Code260 3 years ago

       The Cubs will hold Garza unless they get a kings ransom for him in return. As well they should. Cubs traded away nearly half their farm system to land Garza in the first place. They now have the leverage to restock that farm system with some quality young talent.

      • cubs223425 3 years ago

        Gratned, none of those prospects are working out. Archer’s got one good start under his belt and Lee hasn’t really progressed. Chirinos looks like a backup, Guyer isn’t looking like a lot of anything, and Fuld is AAA depth.

      • Slopeboy 3 years ago

        Hendry was a fool to give away the farm for Garza. You shouldn’t expect another
        GM to follow suit. Garza is not a huge difference maker and while he is good pitcher, he won’t command a kings ransom.

        • schaddy24 3 years ago

          Keep in mind that Hendry is now with your Yanks. If I were you I would be praying that he doesn’t get into Cashman’s head. If thats the case the Cubs will get anything they want for Garza. The Cubs will get a few good, young, controllable players who are near major league ready. If nobody offers that, they will keep him and resign/trade at a later date.

          • Slopeboy 3 years ago

            Keep in mind that he’s only an ‘advisor’. There’s a better chance of him being the Cubs GM once again than of him making any real player decisions for the Yankees.

            Edit:

          • burtonbball88 3 years ago

            Do you know the definition of advisor?

          • Slopeboy 3 years ago

            Yes, it means NOT GM

          • johnsilver 3 years ago

            We will know Cashman has gone off of the deep end if he secretly grabs Minaya away from the Padres as another advisor..

            Unless he is looking to have 2 guys dress up in court jester costumes whenever Hank & Hal come around?

          • burtonbball88 3 years ago

            He won’t be making the decisions, but he will evaluate and help Cashman make the decisions. That’s pretty close to making decisions. I bet you lose some sleep tonight over that tidbit of information.

    • slider32 3 years ago

      That’s all true but Theo would rather trade him than have him as the ace on a  poor team next year. I say Theo takes the best offer that comes along for Garza and Dempster this year.

      • nictonjr 3 years ago

        They can still trade him next year.  Right now they have Garza for 1 1/2 years, a 1st rd pick and 1 supplemental pick in 2014.  Garza’s tag should be sky high.  His main risk is injury.  And Garza has been pretty durable…

        • slider32 3 years ago

          All I’m saying is the longer Theo waits the less his value will be.

          • schaddy24 3 years ago

            I do agree that the longer Theo waits, the more his value drops. We may have him under contract for next year, but his value is highest now because the other team automatically gets a full season out of him next year. Whereas if we keep him until next years all star break, he will be a half season rental. There is no way that we would get more for half a season than a year and a half. I say trade him now.

          • LazerTown 3 years ago

            Plus teams don’t get the draft pick for the midseason rentals, but if he is traded this year they can get the extra 2 draft picks next year.  That is at least worth 1 extra good prospect.

      • Ptk123 3 years ago

        Theo isn’t the GM!

        • slider32 3 years ago

          OK Hoyer, same point!

        • LazerTown 3 years ago

          In reality they both probably make decisions together and are both trying to turn the team around.

    • notsureifsrs 3 years ago

      “he’ll easily be the ace of the 2013 staff”

      should work on being a passable #2 of the 2012 staff first, don’t you think

      sweet “power position”, bros. he had one very good year before turning back into a pumpkin and you didn’t even capitalize

    • Greg Gallo 3 years ago

      Power position relative to what?  They suck this year and they’ll suck next year, any value he provides for the next 1 season will not result in a playoff berth for the Cubs, and there’s no scenario where .5 seasons of Garza brings a better return than 1.5 seasons of Garza (plus a draft pick I think?).  Of course they’d rather trade him now.  If they’d just as soon keep him, THAT would be a power position, but there’s no way that’s the case.

  2. afc1368 3 years ago

    The yanks should pursue garza and possibly try to sign a short term contract with hamels because they will need another lefty once pettite retires most likely next year.

    • Any agent/team that suggests a short-term contract to Hamels will be laughed out of baseball. He may be looking at the biggest FA pitching contract in the history of baseball. If he doesn’t get that, he’ll DEFINITELY have one of the 5-10 biggest contracts.

      • you have to look at what Weaver just signed for. 85 million. Hamels wont get anything more then that. Weaver has been a far much better pitcher then hamels has been and weaver is a ACE. so to sign hamels for 4 or 5 years at 75 million is more realistic.

        • MB923 3 years ago

          You really don’t think Hamels will get more than $85 million? I’d be surprised if he got Less than $100 million.

        • nictonjr 3 years ago

          You’d have to look at what Sabathia just got.  And that was with no other teams bidding.  Hamels will get between 22.5-25 mil a year…

        • cubs223425 3 years ago

          Everyone knows Weaver took a discount. Agents aren’t accepting that as a comparison. Matt Cain is probably the low end.

      • MB923 3 years ago

        Well the short term contract situation almost happened with Prince Fielder. I’m sure if Victor Martinez was not hurt, the Tigers would not have given him the contract he got, maybe not even a contract at all.

        I am not saying that will happen to Hamels (matter of fact my prediction is No), but I can’t say it’s impossible.

        • Robb Logan 3 years ago

          Prince would be in Doyer blue most likely as they had put a lucrative 7 year deal on the table about 2.5 mil less a season that the Tigers had offered. 

  3. johnsilver 3 years ago

    Fish also can’t make up their mind from one month to the next if they are going to win 20 games, or lose 20. This month, Anibel Sanchez could easily be available, further “flooding” the SP market so that sky high asking price for Garza could go down some.

    Teams with a hot commodity will always be asking more this early on and the price will gradually decrease.. It happens every year as the deadline gets closer, so don’t everyone panic.

    By the last week of July (if no SP are moved) I can easily see Hamels, grienke, Garza and Sanchez available and none are going to bust a system.

    • ugotrpk3113 3 years ago

      It’s a good point. It might actually make for a quiet trade deadline, especially if no one wants to budget from a higher asking price.

  4. slider32 3 years ago

    A good trade is one that benefits both teams, I’m not sure the Yanks have what the Cubs want which is front line pitching. The Jays have the best pitching prospects. The Cubs might take Baneulos and Phelps.

    • they can take banuelos and phelps. aside from sabathia come next season they will have 3 young starters in their rotation. pineda,nova and hughes are in their early to mid 20’s. adding garza who is 28 i think and signing him for 5 years wouldnt be bad lol.

      • MB923 3 years ago

        Obviously it wiill take more than Banuelos and Phelps. I really hope the Yankees do not get rid of their young hitters considering they don’t even have any young hitters in their current lineup. I’d be mad if they got rid of Mason Williams, Gary Sanchez, Dante Bitchette Jr. , etc.

        I am not saying these guys will all be great players, but it’s going to hurt them in the long run.

        • oh id be upset also if they got rid of austin,williams, sanchez. Bichette last i saw wasnt doing to well with the bat but then again he still has time. but Williams and austin who are their two best hitters (OF prospcts) id be upset for sure. i can see those two taking over for granderson and swisher by 2015 the latest.

          • slider32 3 years ago

            Chris, I would agree the Yanks won’t get rid of their young hitters. Swisher will be gone after this year.

          • MB923 3 years ago

            If they don’t get rid of Any of their young hitters, then I certainly do not expect back an all star or all star caliber pitcher. It’s a tough decision for them. 

          • LazerTown 3 years ago

            Williams, Austin, Slade are probably all at minimum 1 year away.  If gardner could ever get healthy….

          • LazerTown 3 years ago

            As far as im concerned, Banuelos, Sanchez, Williams, Campos should be kept.  The rest I would trade if the need arises.  I would like to keep Bichette, and Austin, but if They could get a valuable piece do it.

      • slider32 3 years ago

        I think the Yanks have been looking for a good #2 pitcher for over a year now, Garza could be that man. Nova and Hughes have done very well this year and have solidified their pitching. Garza could put them over the top.

    • cubs223425 3 years ago

      I wouldn’t even want them. Banuelos hasn’t had anything really good since his time at high-A in 2010. Phelps is all right, but nothing special. I wouldn’t even answer the phone if I didn’t hear “Mason Williams.”

      • slider32 3 years ago

        I don’t think the Cubs are looking for outfielders they have 3 great prospects of their own. Pitching and catching would be the positions they might want in a trade.

        • MB923 3 years ago

          I wouldn’t be that mad if the Yankees got rid of Sanchez. I’d rather them keep Mason and Dante over Sanchez, simply due to some of the other deep catching prospects we have (no not saying they will be great)

          • LazerTown 3 years ago

            Sanchez is a terrific hitter, even if he doesn’t stick at catcher he will make the team, maybe future rf.  Romine really isn’t that good a hitter, although he is terrific defensively, and who knows if murphy ever makes it.

          • MB923 3 years ago

             Yeah he’s certainly our best hitting Catcher but I do think he’s one of our hitting prospects that we can part ways with. Williams has the potential to be a 5 tool player. No guarantees though of course.

        • cubs223425 3 years ago

          When there’s little pitching or catching to be gotten, you have to settle for best available. Sanchez is hitting fine, but might not stick as a catcher. Romine can’t hit. Neither Betances nor Banuelos is exactly lighting up the minors.

          I’d rather get Williams than those pitchers. I’d actually rather trade Garza elsewhere, but you don’t always get what you want. Besides, it’s not like Jackson’s trying to reach the majors (he’s playing like crap). Szczur and Soler aren’t close either, and Almora has yet to sign.

          The team sucks, and they just need talent in general. THey could always trade Williams elsewhere if they wanted.

    • MaineSox 3 years ago

      A good trade is one where you completely rip the other team off.

  5. stonepie 3 years ago

    garza is good, his asking price is outrageous. definitely not worth it especially in the yankees situation. cc will be back soon and while andy hurts, hes not out for the season. no real reason to trade for garza unless someone went down for the year. Pass

  6. ugotrpk3113 3 years ago

    The Astros were rumored to get Zach Lee for Carlos Lee. I don’t get why people think the asking price for Garza is unrealistic. 

    Throw it out there – say you want the farm. You never know when someone will get desperate. The mistake would be NOT asking for the farm.

  7. Just not confident we have the pieces to get a deal with any of the above.  I could be wrong, never know what another scout or GM sees in your young talent.  But from my POV, I just don’t see it…

    • we have the pieces for all three. the brewers are looking for a SS who can develop in their farm system since their gm has said they dont have a developing SS, the yankees have cito culver to start with an offer

      the phillies are looking for OF and 3B – yanks have Bichette Jr (3B) Williams and Austin who are both OF hitting for power but williams is a 5 tool player. has speed, good defense, hits for average, power and a good arm. Austin could be another CarGo if his power develops just a tad more.

      Cubs – their just looking to empty any teams farm basically so they can rebuild their own.

      its just in the matter of the yankees wanting to give any of those guys up for a 2 month rental. which id be upset as im sure many yankee fans would be if they did.

      • MB923 3 years ago

        Garza would be under team control for next year (don’t recall Greinke’s situation)

      • cubs223425 3 years ago

        As was said, Garza’s under team control for 2013. You’re delusional with those prospects, though.

        Austin’s playing well, I’ll give you that. He could be a nice trade chip. Culver and Biechette are playing at levels worse than bad, though. NEither has an OPS of even .640, and Culver’s not even at .610. Both guys have yet to make it to even high-A, and their offense has been so bad that it’s unrosterable with an MLB club.

        The Yankees have the pieces (Sanchez, Williams, Betances, Banuelos, and maybe Austin) for one ace-level pitcher. There’s no way they get 3, and trying for 2 is very unlikely, unless they totally empty the farm.

        Besides, they want to get to $189 million, and they are apparently not even able to afford Swisher while doing that, let alone 2 or 3 of Garza, Hamels, and Greinke. They might not even be able to afford one.

      • Slopeboy 3 years ago

        You’re throwing out names that you think are special, but are not at all. Culver has been in the NYY organization for three years and is having difficulty hitting in
        A Ball. Williams and Bichete are also in A Ball, and have yet to show anything either. You are not getting Hamels or Garza, even with money or another prospect for that package.

        While both the Cubs and Phils want prospects, they want something substantial
        with a shorter timeline to the ML. These guys are all 3-4yrs away and aside from names and high drafts selections, haven’t shown anything that would get you Hamels or Garza.

  8. afc1368 3 years ago

    Honestly I can’t see the Yankees signing hamels. However garza is a lot more realistic in their signing future because of their salary cap

    • MB923 3 years ago

      The Yankees MIGHT have 4 starters set in stone for quite some time – Sabathia, Pineda, Hughes (He’s the reason I said MIGHT) and Nova. Throw in someone like Banueols or Betances for a 5th man in a couple of years and they could have a solid 5 for several years.

      The Yankees do not need to sign any big name FA pitcher anytime soon. 

      • John Lazzaro 3 years ago

         Neither Betances or Benuelos is ready for the major leagues that’s the main reason neither are on the team right now. After seeing Betances walk the ball park I’m not really too confident with that guy. Phelps and Garcia can only do so much and may end up blowing up at some point especially Phelps whose going to pitch alot more then Garcia. Garcia as a starter is close to over as that would have been the 2nd week in a row.

        • MB923 3 years ago

           I know they’re not ready right now. That’s why I’m referring to 2014 when things can change. My point was that they could have 4 good starters by then. They don’t need to be heavy spenders on any free agent pitchers anytime soon.

      • LazerTown 3 years ago

        Depends how the year plays out.  If hughes and nova are solid and pineda is getting close to healthy then no need to sign someone.  But if hughes hits alot more bumps, or pineda is not showing good signs they may need someone.

    • slider32 3 years ago

      I agree Garza takes them through the 2014 cap season, he is signed through 2013.

  9. Mike1L 3 years ago

    Garza isn’t good enough to spend a ransom of players for. The Yankees would be best served by playing it conservative and giving themselves a reasonable shot at getting under the luxury tax threshold in 2014. Off-loading prospects diminishes the possibility that they can leverage their lower salaries to afford more expensive talent down the road. 

  10. cubs223425 3 years ago

    What’s unrealistic?

  11. notsureifsrs 3 years ago

    expecting matt garza to be an ace because he had one very good year out of ~6

    also expecting other people to expect that and pay for it

  12. captainjeter 3 years ago

    duh, expecting a  “king’s  ransom ” for a 4th starter? We are not taking Verlander, King Felix, CC, Halladay , Kershaw, Cain by any means.

  13. cubs223425 3 years ago

    Who’s saying he’s a surefire ace? I asked what about the COST is unrealistc, not the projected talent.

    The Cubs have the only pitcher capable of being a #1/2 on the market who isn’t in a contract year.

  14. notsureifsrs 3 years ago

    edited for clarity:

    it depends on when you look. all offseason into april? just about every cub fan alive would tell you of garza’s transformation into ace-master ace. over the past few months that derp herd has thinned, and now we just have a bunch of qualifying clauses like “well, he’s not a surefire ace, but…”

    i mean more power to the cubs for negotiating aggressively (and to you if you’re acknowledging garza’s status), but garza is the least-certain commodity on the market – liriano excluded

  15. captainjeter 3 years ago

    just because they overpayed the rays for him , does not  mean they are  going to  get another team to be just as stupid as they were. He is  #4 , not a  #1  or  2

  16. cubs223425 3 years ago

    No, he said the price was unrealistic. I asked what was unrealistic, in reference to that. I expected the implication that I was asking what abotu the price was unrealistic to be obvious, but I guess it wasn’t.

    I never claimed Garza to be an ace this season. Last season, I said he had put up numbers to warrant being called an ace, and that it wasn’t unrealistic for him to keep it up because of how his repertoire had changed–he had become a different pitcher and had the results in his favor.

    That he’s regressed doesn’t necessarily mean that he can’t do it again, but he’s not an ace right now, that’s for sure. It’s not that he IS an ace, but he can be one. What are the Cubs trading for? A bunch of guys who MIGHT be decent players. Garza’s like a very high-floor prospect. His floor is a great #3, maybe a low-end #2. He’s something of a mid-range #2 right now, and can be a #1 if he gets it together.

    You say he’s the most uncertain commodity, but he’s also the only with an extra year of team control.

  17. cubs223425 3 years ago

    I’ll also try to tackle this from another angle:

    Zack Greinke has 3.5 WAR in 17 starts. If we say 32 starts is what these guys will hit (a fair number, 31-33 is realistic), then he has 15 starts left. At his current pace, he will provide the Yankees with 3.08 WAR in his time with them.

    Cole Hamels has 2.4 WAR in 16 starts. He’ll get 16 more starts, which mieans another 2.4 WAR. He should give the Yankees about 2.4 WAR if he’s with them for those 16 starts.

    Garza has made only 15 starts, but he was skipped once, so he probably has 16 starts left as well. Thus far, Garza has managed just 1.2 WAR. In his final 16 starts, you’re looking at around 1.28 WAR from Garza, or 2.48 on the season. If he manages that, then his career average per 32 starts will be about 3.3. We’ll cut it to 3.0 because the 5.0 last season was a pretty big boost to the average. In his time with the Yankees (since he has an extra year of team control), Garza can be expected to offer roughly 4.28 WAR, more than a full win greater than what Greinke would bring them (though at the cost of an extra year’s salary–something that won’t matter to them).

    So Garza should offer the most value over his time there of the 3. If he gets back anywhere close to his 2011 abilities, you could be talking a return of 5-7 WAR with that trade.

  18. notsureifsrs 3 years ago

    – i knew what you meant, i just took it as an opening for a wisecrack. can’t help myself

    – for a contender, .5 years of an ace > 1.5 of a #3. the uncertainty is huge

    – i don’t have a dog in the fight. it amazes me how consistently garza is overvalued around baseball and it only takes one GM to pull the trigger on a crazy deal, so the cubs should be asking for an unrealistic haul…

    …but i’m also gonna do what i should, and call it that. garza is at least one full tier below hamels and greinke. chicago should ask for the world but no one should give it to them

  19. notsureifsrs 3 years ago

    i appreciate the data (srs), but you understand the glaring flaw in that analysis right? actually there are a couple

    the first is scarcity: 3 WAR pitchers are waaay easier to replace than 5 WAR pitchers. if this were simply a matter of accumulating the most WAR, it would always make more sense to acquire 3 1.5 WAR players than 1 4 WAR player. quality matters. a lot

    the second is purpose: we don’t just care accumulated value here, but the context in which it will be obtained. specifically, the buyers right now are looking for talent that will help them get to the playoffs and then win there. a 3 WAR pitcher and a 5 WAR pitcher are not equally suited to this task. not by a long shot

    i mean i don’t think i need to elaborate on these points, do i? if you’re smart enough to dig into the data you have, you’re smart enough to know this stuff

  20. cubs223425 3 years ago

    The second point is a fair one. The first is a misinterpretation of the data.

    3 1.5 WAR pitcher are not better than 1 4 WAR pitcher because that 1 4 WAR pitcher is going to come with 2 additional arms. Even at replacement level (1.0 WAR), those 3 total 6 WAR, compared to the 4.5 WAR of the first group.

    What Garza offers the Yankees is the chance to have him for 2 postseason runs. They’ll almsot assuredly make the playoffs, with or without Greinke, Hamels, or Garza. Also, note the career playoff stats:

    Greinke: 3 starts, 6.48 ERA
    Hamels: 13 starts, 3.09 ERA
    Garza: 5 starts, 3.48 ERA

    So you could argue that Garza’s better postseason track record than Greinke’s closes their gap in value. You know that Garza can come out of the AL East and pitch well in the postseason. IF you’re talking about getting you to the postseason, any of these guys will do. If you’re talking about winning in the postseason, Garza has a leg up on Greinke in that regard. So you’ll get Garza’s better postseason record (compared to Greinke), and you’ll get it for 2 years.

  21. cubs223425 3 years ago

    So you’re saying that Matt Garza isn’t a top-60 starter in baseball? Let’s validate your claim:

    2008: 2.9 WAR (44th in MLB)
    2009: 3.1 WAR (44th in MLB)
    2010: 1.6 WAR (81st in MLB)
    2011: 5.0 WAR (13th in MLB)
    2012: 1.2 WAR (60th in MLB)

    Average WAR: 2.76 WAR
    Average Rank: 48.4th in MLB

    Total (2008-2012): 13.8 WAR (31st in MLB)

    So in his time as a full-time MLB start, Matt Garza has accrued the 31st-most WAR among MLB starting pitchers. There are 30 teams in baseball, meaning ranking 31st places him as the top #2 pitcher in baseball over the past 4.5 years.

    He’s a #3 at best? That’s a statement missing logic. Oh, and Matt Garza managed that 31st ranking with a 3.76 ERA, right in-line with that 3.70 you offered.

    Garza’s shown the ability to vary from a mid-level #1 to a mid-level #3. Calling him a mid-level #2 is a fair assessment, saying his best is a #3 when he’s beaten that 4 out of 5 times makes no sense.

  22. cubs223425 3 years ago

    Twice he ranked 44th in the majors in WAR with the Rays, that in his 3 full seasons there. That’s a mid-level #2 starter ranking.

    Garza was also 49th in MLB WAR during his 3 seasons with the Rays, about where a mid-level #2 stands.

    So, again, #2, NOT a #3.

  23. LazerTown 3 years ago

    Not necesarily, I understand what you are trying to get at but it only works if all teams are equal, and each team has 1 of the top 30 pitchers but a playoff contenders rotation is often much better than a non-contender.

    Do the Rockies, Royals, or Astros have anyone resembling an Ace. 

    Garza is a great player and would be thrilled if the yankees got him for the right price.  His era in the AL east comes out to ~3.87 in 3 years (good sample size).  So with that in mind is he better than CC, Kuroda, Pettitte, (or Price, Shields, Hellickson).  He would actually slot in as the #2 on the Sox, or #1 on the O’s.

    I’m not a big fan of small sample playoff stats.  Greinke may be bad in the postseason or it may have included a couple rough starts he had, plus his stats against a strong offense in the playoffs is different than facing the stros in the regular season.

  24. cubs223425 3 years ago

    Yeah, I agree with you on a lot of that. One thing I don’t agree with is bringing up Hellickon, who has horrendous peripherals that tell me he’s eventually going to faceplant, sort of like Wade Davis. For him to succeed, he’s going to have to be a talent on the level of Glavine and Maddux, as his stuff doesn’t generate strikeouts, and he has issues with walks.

    As for my spreading of the wealth, that’s how it has to be determined. You can’t say Garza wouldn’t be a #2 because the Phillies had what was expected to be the best rotation in baseball history last season. If you use the deefnse that some teams have no ace, then there’s no fair measuring stick of talent.

    I mean, do you call Garza a #4 because of what the Phillies have? Do you call him a #1 because of what the Royals don’t have? Talent is talent, no matter which team it’s on. You have to put things like this in a normalized environment, or there’s no way to evaluate talent.

    And yes, I agree that 3 starts isn’t enoguh to evaluate a career in the postseaosn. I brought that up because the guy I was responding to brought up performing in the postseason. I was simply trying to show that Garza can do that, and he has a record to show he’s worth the investment on that front.

  25. LazerTown 3 years ago

    Agreed, I was just using the example to show you can’t do 1 for 1.  I like garza, but for the 3.85 era he averaged in the AL East, I don’t think that the cubs have any leverage to get the talent they want. 

  26. cubs223425 3 years ago

    I’m not going to argue this with you. There are loads of numbers in these comments on this already. Since becoming a full-time starter, Matt Garza has been rated as the 31st-best starter in baseball. That’s not a number 4.

    I can tell by your 2 comments and screen name that you’re unwilling to listen to facts or reason though, so you live in your bubble of false information.

Leave a Reply