Tuesday, November 27, 2007

For the Record...

Johan Santana is better than any pitcher currently on the Yankees.

He will be better than any pitcher currently on the Yankees for the next number of years.

I would trade any pitcher currently on the Yankees for him (with an extension, of course).

There are preferences (Horne, Whelan, Jackson and Cabrera for Santana? Where do I sign?) but when it all comes down to it, with the Mussina/Abreu/Giambi money coming off the books, Santana should be acquired if there's any chance of it happening.

Labels: ,

posted by Mr. Faded Glory @ 6:59 PM   8 comments


At 11/27/2007 7:17 PM, Blogger Rex Banner said...

You must be taking some good drugs if you still think the Twins will settle for players not named Joba/Hughes/Kennedy(maybe). Keep drinking that kool-aid! That trade may fly in MVP Baseball.

At 11/27/2007 7:19 PM, Blogger Mr. Faded Glory said...

Did you miss the part where the entire blog post was about the fact that I would trade any single pitcher on the Yankees, and that Kennedy/Chamberlain/Hughes are on the Yankees?

At 11/27/2007 7:31 PM, Blogger Rex Banner said...

Yet you still post that ridiculous proposal without any of them.

At 11/28/2007 5:52 AM, Blogger Mike said...

I would not give up any of "The 3" for Santana. He does not have good numbers vs Boston, Toronto and Anaheim. Three very important rivals. Also his numbers in those ballparks are not so hot. Yanks can live without him.

At 11/28/2007 9:04 PM, Blogger Rich said...

Not me, and here's part of the reason why:

red flag

At 11/28/2007 9:18 PM, Blogger Mr. Faded Glory said...

Ok, you guys should both know by now how I feel about sample sizes, and both examples given are tiny.

Mike, look at his numbers in Yankee Stadium -they're fantastic and he'd get half of his starts there. I find that just as meaningless.

Rich, if we're going to ignore the rest of his career and focus on a 1 1/2 months, what's the point? The Yankees should dump Wang because he was awful in the playoffs?

I don't buy into incredibly small sample sizes such as Santana's games since Aug 17 any more than I buy into the argument that A-Rod has been awful in the post season (starting with Game 5 of the ALCS in 2004). Something either is true or it isn't, and looking at tiny samples are a poor indicator of overall success or failure.

At 11/29/2007 12:36 AM, Blogger Rich said...

As a general point, I agree about sample size, but there is an exception: what if the sample size is caused by an injury? I have read reports that he had trouble throwing his slider late in the season.

Even if Santana is not injured, I think Hughes (who may well have a better career than Joba) can be 80% as good as Santana in 2008 at a fraction of the cost, and probably as good by 2010. When you factor in the staggering financial commitment that acquiring Santana would require, I would rather stand pat.

If Kennedy can be substituted for Hughes, I would understand making the trade.

Also, I get more enjoyment watching prospects develop and then play for the major league club (even if it means losing) than rooting for a rotisserie team of other team's stars, although I realize that is a minority view.

At 11/29/2007 6:12 AM, Blogger Mike said...

Small sample or not. I'm not in favor of giving up Hughes, Kennedy or Chamberlain for Santana. I agree with Rich.

I hope I don't have to write an "I told ya so" article on my blog.


Post a Comment

<< Home

 L   I   N   K   S

P   R   E   V   I   O   U   S
P   O   S   T   S

C   O   N   T   A   C   T  

Subscribe to High and Tight via your favorite RSS reader:
Add to Google

Powered by Blogger