Having the rug pulled from under them, it's almost difficult to believe their umbrage, when stories like this have been popping up ever since the Yankees moved in to their new stadium (Note the top where it's mentioned that the Steinbrenners pulled out of their lease at the last second, I guess it's only OK when the Yankees do things like that). Of course, whether I'm insulted at their insult makes no difference, they get to do whatever they'll do. If that happens to be punishing the Mariners by denying them whatever they can deny them, then so be it. However, that is a two-way street, as in cutting themselves off from deals with the Mariners, they're limiting their own option as well.
The Yankees are already cut off from one of the other big payroll teams more than any team is cut off from any other team. I'm of course referring to the Red Sox, and just as the Yankees are one of a handful of teams that can pull off mega deals, the Mariners are one of the 15 or so teams with the payroll capacity to take on players with larger contracts. The Yankees are already at war with the Red Sox, how much would it complicate matters for them to add the Mariners to THE LIST?
Q. Why are the Yankees being so shrill?
A. There are umpteen times, in negotiations in all walks of life, when you ask a business partner to make a really paaaaiiiinnnnnnful concession. The only way he will agree to do that, is if you incentivize him. Big time.
The only incentivization the M's reasonably had, was to say "the deal's done if you say Montero", and sure enough, this is what the Yankees allege that they did.
As one of the GM's in the Sherman articles pointed out, what the M's should have done (and maybe did do) was say, "Okay, if Montero's in, let us check back with one club real quick and after that check, we'll wrap this up within an hour." Then everything would have been ethical.
Maybe the M's did do that. The Yankees flatly state that they did not, and it sounds to me like the Yankees are being frank on this one. They're the ones who are coming out public, and the M's are the ones staring over in stony silence.
...............
You drop your pants and say, "okay, you win, let's get this over with," and the other guy says, no, just kidding ... that's maddening. Have had it happen. Am a calm guy but at those moments I want to break something. Using the other dude as the instrument.
.
Q. If the Yankees' story is true, was it worth it? Did Capt Jack get nice return for his cred points?
A. I was stunned to read Sherman's report that 5-of-6 GM's preferred Justin Smoak to Jesus Montero. Have been kinda noodling on this weird report all week.
Look, Jesus Montero at the age of 19 was a better hitter than Gary Carter, Jose Canseco, probably better than Mike Piazza at 19 ... and that's despite playing defense first!
... It's not just the (awesome) performances saber-wise. Jesus Montero is Frank Thomas: a big hulking guy who is light on his feet, a natural hitter, a guy who can turn on a ball and crush it 440, or who can easily line the ball to RF on a hit-and-run ... Edgar or Piazza plus 30 lbs. Again, Frank Thomas if the Hurt were a free swinger.
The only hitting prospects I've been more impressed with have been ARod, Josh Hamilton, Cesar Cedeno, Junior, that kind of guy. But Montero is right there with anybody else.
And the GM's are saying Smoak is better than Montero ?! That's like hearing 5-of-6 GM's say that Ichiro is nothing compared to Dustin Ackley. So, who's this Ackley guy then?
.
Q. Maybe the GM's prefer Smoak because of Montero's off year at 20?
A. They can't be serious. Smoak is one level up, struggling at the age of 23. Does that deter them? Are they that sensitive to curb appeal and last week's games?
No, they know better than that.
.
Q. Why then?
A. The GM's simply think Smoak is better than The Next Frank Thomas. This includes Jack Zduriencik, who paid dearly not to obtain Jesus Montero. That is kind of like watching the HAL-9000 computer put its neural net on the line, because it wanted to upgrade from Stephen Strasburg to something a lot better.
Why do the GM's like Smoak so much better than Montero? They think that Justin Smoak is going to be Stan Musial or something. That's why.
Having looked at Smoak from touching distance the last week, I'm not real quick to rule Stan out for the kid.
.
Be Afraid,
Dr D
.
Comments
It;s funny to watch New York whine and moan under these circumstances. It's kind of like watching them complain to the on-field ump about Felix (hypothetically) putting pine tar on his best pitches... only to have them break a bat on one, leaving cork all over the infield.
All the news reports throughout the entire bidding process were talking about how 'the Yankees are out on Lee', 'New York is kicking the tires but is not serious,' or 'the Yankees are waiting until the offseason to get Lee (as they assuredly will).' Steinbrenner and co did everything they could to MINIMIZE the market for Lee - to project the image that they didn't want Lee all that badly right now, and that even if they did there was no way someone of Montero's caliber was going to be involved in a trade.
Now, does that make sense? Of course! You want to get what you can at the best price possible in high-business scenarios - that's your job. Don't pay more than you have to. But in the end, Montero was always going to be the asking price... and the Yanks were trying to keep an artificial cap on the market price. Should they really be surprised if Jack Z shopped their best offer around (if indeed that's what he did... sounds like Texas is the one who came on strong!) once they finally made it?
If New York hadn't been actively working to keep Montero's name out of the 'reasonable' speculation, Texas would have had to put Smoak on the table much earlier to be taken seriously. Maybe New York would have had a chance to respond to Texas' heavy offer, rather than having the Adams injury cripple their bid at the last moment with no reaction time. Or maybe New York just wouldn't have had so much egg on their face when Seattle went with their preference of Smoak. Either way, it's not hard to argue that the Yankees sit in a disappointment of their own making. Sometimes going the extra mile to keep prices down (denying almost all interest whatsoever, then jumping straight to the 'here's Montero' offer as if that was the plan all along) can backfire painfully into your face.
Two things:
1. Once Montero was included and talks with the Yankees got serious, if the Mariners expressly told the Yankees they would not shop the offer, then they deserve the scorn. However, while the outlines of a deal are in place but negotiations are still in process and yet to be finalized, it would be foolish of the Mariners to make this statement. All further leverage in negotiations would have been suspended. Clearly, if negotiations are continuing, then a team MUST maintain some form of leverage, otherwise it is no more a negotiation. I don't believe the Mariners made such a clear-cut statement, and so the Yankees would have to be aware of the risk of the deal falling through as long as they failed to agree to everything the M's wanted. It's the nature of the beast.
2. The other teams who are reportedly so irked at the Mariners? Where did they get their information as to what actually happened? The Yankees? Of course. Doc, you can take it that the M's remaining tight-lipped is a tacit acknowledgment of the Yankees' version of events. But this is not necessarily so. In fact, it is classic Jack Zduriencik. He will NOT comment on classified information. Period. Even if it means he suffers the wrath of the Yankees in silence. Let me put this another way. Is there ANYTHING in Jack's tenure here that would lead us to believe he would do something he believed was unethical baseball-wise? I think not. Now it is possible that the Yankees think he did while Jack thinks he did not. That's just a difference of opinion.
In the end, I choose to believe what my experience so far with Jack tells me, that he played hardball, but hardball by the rules. The Yankees see it differently. Who made them kings? Oh yeah, baseball did. Well here's mud in your eye, your Highnesses?!
Agreed.
Granted the timespan is short, but Zduriencik has traded with many teams--and only the Yankees have complained about how they've been treated. The Yankees, more than most other teams it seems, feel compelled to defend being on the losing end of negotiations. Rather than be fried by local media, they'd rather tell reporters that the other team acted unethically.
As for the future impact of this deal, I doubt any other GM will factor in New York's opinion of Seattle during negotiations. If Seattle burns another GM in the way that the Yankees claim to have been burned, maybe this hurts future deals. And ultimately, I don't think this hurts the Zduriencik/Cashman relationship (notice Cashman hasn't officially said anything about negotiations either).
I think rational self-interest for both teams will win out in the end. If Seattle floated a high-caliber player that the Yankees wanted, you can bet that Montero's would be the first name discussed.
First of all, NYY working the media is like Coach K working the refs. Those of us destined to be mere mortals might find it annoying, but there's not much point in pounding sand over it. It's part of the landscape.
But I think this point is key: Justin Smoak under Seattle club control vs. Justin Smoak under Texas club control potentially changes the balance of power in the AL West for the next five years.
Z wasn't just adding a young hitting star, he was subtracting one from the Rangers. Montero would have to be a lot better to make up for that.
I'm thinking the "position" questions with Montero are screwing up his projections from scouts.
Everything I've read to date says he is NOT (yet) a major league competent catcher ... not even up to the minimalist standards of Mauer and VMart, (most are unaware that Mauer's WP/PB numbers aren't far removed from Rob Johnson's).
It's impossible to "completely" divest oneself of defensive value. Even at 1B there is variance in defensive ability. Even when you opt to put Jose Canseco's monster bat in LF, you *KNOW* he's giving back some runs with his glove.
Montero, (I believe), is currently viewed by baseball as a "long shot" to stick at catcher. But, (just as Tampa did with Upton), you want to give a KID a pretty long incubation period of instruction before you throw in the defensive towel. He's obviously got "some" of the tools needed to BE a decent catcher ... he's just not doing it. And THAT is a problem. Until they try him in LF - or at 1B -- NOBODY knows where he'll land on the defensive spectrum ... and that *HAS* to hurt his value ... because with the generic uncertainty of any prospect, it's "comforting" to be "certain" about something. Defense tends to be a variable where scouts reach firm conclusions QUICKLY.
Knocking the steak, because the salad sucked may not be fair ... but it's human. We know how much Clement's stock plunged when it was decided he was never going to be a catcher. Didn't change his bat ... but it DID change his value. (And, there is the argument that telling an uber-prospect, "Sorry, you're just not good enough" - defensively - can have unintended consequences on that bat.
But, if you're judging bat A ... with a solid track record of plus defense at 1B ... versus bat B ... with zero track record at 1B ... (and failing grades at catcher) ... if the bats are comperable ... then I think the defensive situation could easily tip the scales for most GMs.
Check out Jesus Montero's stats AT THIS TIME.......was someone MENTIONING off year??????
Check out Smoak's stats AT THIS TIME..............snicker
Do "experts" REALLY think these two deserve to be mentioned in the same breath?
Enough with the "bad glove" for Montero. He ISN'T a bad catcher, and he will improve.
He's twenty.......THREE YEARS YOUNGER THAN SMOAK (oh, but smoak will be hitting his prime......what bs)
JM plays in a ballpark and league built for pitchers.
Smoak hits in a band box........(and look at those "numbers" hhhaaaaaaaaaaa!)
Face it. The Yanks are THRILLED that deal soured....and it will go down as one of the worse deals in MLB history form the Mariner perspective.
...I can see why you'd remain anonymous making that comment. =) Some pretty over-the-top hyperbole there, as well as some very small sample size error in your logic. Oh well... thanks for livening up the conversation. ^_^
Smoak hits in a HORRIBLE pitcher's park...either here in Seattle...or in Tacoma...which is actually a worse pitcher's park than Safeco Field.
Please take your stupidity elsewhere, k?
Obvious trolling not even requiring the minimal attention you gave ...
'Worst Trade In Major League History' to land Smoak + for a dozen starts of a rental pitcher... no need to engage with hitterspark vs pitcherspark stuff when a ten-year-old wanders through... Enjoyed the visual images all around though :- )
This poster is being a little overboard, but I do think we could regret passing on Montero for Smoak.
Apparently the Yanks were messing with Montero's swing early in the season... Ever since they let him go back to his old swing. BAM.. 1.100 OPS in AAA as a 20 year old.
Revisiting the comparison with new data wouldn't hurt, obviously. It was only the context in which that analysis was offered which invited comment.
Or, as Doc correctly pointed out - invited a silent rolling of the eyes and moving on. I figured you give a guy a chance to see how his comment was taken, and correct himself if he cares to... but that *was* a pretty obvious attempt at trolling. Responding probably was not worth the wear-and-tear on the keyboard.