Cano to ink 4-year deal?

The Yankees and Robinson Cano are closing in on a 4-year, $30M deal with two option years. This is a fairly significant departure from the Yankees standard operating procedure of going year-to-year with its arbitration eligible players. In 2008, Cano's will be 25 yrs old in terms of "seasonal age," meaning this deal will take him through age 30 if both options are exercised. The deal will buy out Cano's remaining four years of arbitration and two years of free agency. It will be interesting to see how the salaries escalate (Guess here is -- $4M, $6M, $8M, $12M with options at $14M ea.).

I'm happy for Cano. On the other hand, I don't see a huge financial benefit for the Yankees. Don't get me wrong. The Yankees will probably save a few bucks over the course of this deal. Historically, the Yankees have not been a team that operates on a tight budget or a team that looks to lock up talent for below market price, so cost certainty has been a non-issue. This may be the first sign of Hal Steinbrenner (a.k.a. the money brother) having an impact on the way the Yankees do business going forward. Wait, the second sign . . . there's the teams position on Santana.

The real payoff for the Yankees is that they get two free agent years if they want them. And they likely will exercise those option years for the same reason that makes this deal low risk. If you look at Cano's projections, he's going to be either a pretty good player or a ridiculously good player. There's not a lot of downward variation. By the time this deal is over, the Yankees will have enjoyed all of Cano's prime without giving him a $100M contract. That sounds funny, but in Yankeeland, its not a joke.

The guys over at Respect Jeter's Gangster take Cashman to task because Yankees submitted an arbitration offer of $3.2M while Cano was asking for $4.55M for 2008 and $7.5M/yr (the average annual value ("AAV:) of a 4 yr/$30M contract) is not the middle ground between those two figures. I don't agree with their take at all. As I said above, the salaries in this deal will escalate, so the Yankees won't be paying $7.5M this year. The escalation reflects the fact that, if the Yankees and Cano went year to year and Cano continued his current trend of play, he would likely see raises in each of his arbitration years.

For example, Derek Jeter was first eligible for arbitration in 1999, won his arbitration case and received a salary of $5M. In 2000, he avoided arbitration and received a salary of $10M. In 2001, he signed his current contract with an AAV of $18.9M. Alfonso Soriano is another example. In his first year of arbitration he signed for $5.4M. He followed that up with contracts for $7.5M and $10M (lost in arbitration - asked for $12M) before signing the whopper with the Cubs last winter. Some may take issue with these examples, but I'm fairly comfortable with them. Particularly because Neyer just declared Cano the second baseman of the next 5 years. I'd try to compare him to Utley, but Utley never saw the light of his arbitration years, signing a 7 yr./$85M deal.

In the end, I'll say this deal is good for all sides.

No Go Godzilla

River Ave. Blues reports that Hideki Matsui's rehab is not progressing as expected. I can't say that I am surprised by this development. Matsui is 33 yrs. old with a history of knee problems. He went under the knife in mid-November. The reports at the time were that he was expected to be ready for spring training. Count me as one of the people who were wary of those reports. I was thinking and I'm still thinking Matsui is 100% by May 1st.

Donnie Baseball Will Miss '08 Season

Sports Illustrated reports that Donnie is taking a back seat role in the Dodgers organization while he attends to family issues in 2008. I hope everything is ok with his family and whatever issues there are they are quickly and easily resolved. On the other side of the coin, you can only imagine the upheaval that would have come out of this if the Yanks had selected Donnie over Joe Girardi.

Your 2008 New York Yankees Offense

Baseball Musings takes a look at what we can expect out of the Yanks offense this year.

Neyer: Cano Best Second Baseman Over Next Five Seasons

Rob Neyer is finally following through on a project he has wanted to do for some time now -- ranking positions. To be exact, he's ranking position players according to value over the next five years. Robinson Cano leads his list of second baseman (subscription required) (See January 17th Entry).

Update

It's been a while since I posted anything. This has resulted from a confluence of factors. Most significantly, the world of Yankee news has been slow and the world of Me has been busy. With regard to Yankees news, the exception, of course, are the developments with the Congressional depositions and hearings. I find that pretty dull though. A couple of posts to follow. Hopefully, I can get back on track.

The Goose Is Loose

Rich "Goose" Gossage received 86 percent of this year's Hall of Fame vote. He was the only candidate selected by the Baseball Writers Association of America for Hall of Fame enshrinement. Despite having to wait nine years and see an inferior reliever -- Bruce Sutter -- be elected before him, Gossage admitted it was worth the wait.

I Don't Speak English Defense?

Andy Pettitte has hired Pittsburgh-based attorney Jay Reisinger to represent him at the upcoming hearing before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. Reisinger formerly represented Sammy Sosa for his appearance before the same committee three years ago. I hope someone told Andy that Sosa's "no habla ingles" defense is not likely to do the trick for him.

Tim "Rock" Raines v. Jim Ed Rice

Win Shares in three best years consecutively: Rice - 91; Raines - 102

Win Shares in five best years consecutively: Rice - 128; Raines - 163

Career Win Shares: Rice - 282; Raines - 390

Rice:

1974:

1975: 20

1976: 17

1977: 26

1978: 37

1979: 28

1980: 16

1981: 15 (strike year)

1982: 21

1983: 24

1984: 19

1985: 14

1986: 28
1987:
1988:
1989:

Sources: 1974; 1987; 1988; 1989; 1975-1986

Raines:

1979:
1980:
1981: 18 (strike year)
1982: 21
1983: 29
1984: 32
1985: 36
1986: 32
1987: 34
1988: 19
1989: 25
1990: 19
1991: 19
1992: 28
1993: 19
1994: 14 (strike year)
1995: 14
1996:
1997:
1998:
1999:
2001:

Sources: 1979; 1980; 1981-1995; 1996-1999; 2001

After A Long Holiday To Rest His Yapper, Hank Gets Back To Work

Ah yes, Hankenstein. It had been so long since you made headlines that I nearly forgot you. Hank broke his silence, speaking on topics ranging from Clemens to Santana.

On Clemens, Yammerin' Hank was surprisingly brief -- "I'm not signing Clemens." No real surprise here. I;m not sure Clemens is looking to be signed. I know that Clemens has retired and unretired for what seems like the better part of the last decade, but this time appears to be different. Clemens went on record several times during the 2007 campaign that this would be his last and never kick started the rumor mill with the annual "I'm weighing my options" or "I will soon begin to weigh my options" comment in November or December. Now its possible that the Mitchell Report is playing a roll here, but I don't think Clemens will be pitching in 2008.

On Santana, Kim Hank-il declared that the Yanks "are still in it." I've already spoke my mind on these Santana deals. I'm really hoping that Minnesota decides to hang on to him. I would rather see the Yankees take their chances signing him on the free agent market.

So, all in all, Ol' Hank was surprisingly silent and stoic. Then again, everyone needs a few days to readjust to work after a long vacation.

Daily News Will Preside Over Leyritz Expedited Trial

I'll go on record to say that the Daily News' reporting of the Leyritz DUI accident has been nothing short of reckless. By no means do I condone drunken driving, but the manner in which the Daily News initially reported the incident and has continued to report (here and here) is careless and irresponsible. When a driver allegedly runs a red light while drunk, hitting another vehicle and killing its driver, passions do not need to be inflamed any further. Nevertheless, the Daily News runs follow up articles of a priest damning Leyritz and a claim that Leyritz "squandered millions on booze." The priest article is just inflamatory. The booze article is inflamatory and lacks any facts or sources to substantiate the claim.

A-Rod Kicks Off the New Year with a Blockbuster P.R. Campaign

I had a quiet New Year's eve. Stayed in with my fiancee, cooked dinner and watched the ball drop on NBC. Around 3 minutes prior to 12 p.m. in NYC, in the midst of the typical New Year's show, Carson Daly was struck with a look of shock. A "mystery guest" suddenly dropped in and walked on set. Who was it? A-Rod, of course. This was priceless. Classic television. Classic A-Rod.

Daly acted completely surprised. A-Rod smiled and waxed poetically about how great New York is. At one point, a zip lock bag was thrown by a member of the crowd at A-Rod's face. A-Rod and Daly teamed up to make the catch, and A-Rod tossed it back. A-Rod talked about how he and his wife were spending a quiet New Year's eve in New York when they said "what the heck" and decided to drop by Times Square. Well, not a moment too soon! Had A-Rod delayed at all, he probably would have missed the ball dropping.

Side note: For those people who have never been to Times Square for New Years, one doesn't just drop in.

Sometime after I stopped laughing and the ball dropped, I reflected on the A-Rod surprise interview. At that point I remembered that A-Rod hired Guy Oseary to manage his image after Scott Boras had nearly rendered A-Rod libel proof in October and November. I also remembered seeing somewhere (here) that Oseary represents Daly. Then I started to wonder . . . how many markers did Oseary and A-Rod have to call in to get him on the New Years' show in the 3 minutes prior to and including the ball dropping? Or how much of his small fortune, if any, did he have to pony up for those prime time minutes? We'll probably never know, but a few things are for sure: (1) It wasn't a surprise appearance and (2) the 2008 P.R. campaign has officially begun.

Santana situation shows exactly what's wrong with baseball? Really!?!

The Bleacher Bums contends that the "Santana Situation shows exactly what's Wrong with Baseball." I'm just not buying it.

I have a few questions for the folks over there. If the tables were turned and the Yankees, Mets or Red Sox were the "SMTs" with Santana and the Twins were a "BMT," would the Twins trade Mauer and Slowey, plus two lesser prospects for Santana -- a player who is undeniably great but who is at best in the middle of his prime? If you were the Twins' GM would you sign off on that deal for one year of control of Santana plus the exclusive right to sign him to a deal in the range of 7 years and $150M prior to the start of the 2008 season?

Whether its Cano and Hughes, Elsbury and Lester or Mauer and Slowey, the team trading them away would be giving up an excellent player at a premium position (middle of the field) and a starter who is at worst a #3 and at best a #1, plus two guys who represent a roll of the dice. All those players are controllable for at least 4 years each at least into the prime of their careers at reasonable amounts of money.

This is simple economics. Trading Reyes, Cano or Ellsbury, along with the existing packages from the Mets, Yankees and Red Sox for Santana would be a terrible deal for each of those teams.

And there's nothing wrong with baseball. Baseball has gone from a $1 billion dollar industry in 1990 to a $3 billion dollar industry in 2000 to a $6 billion dollar industry in 2007. If there is something wrong with baseball, its that fans believe these teams are poor despite the record growth in earnings and the rapid increase in the value of each club (Pohlad purchased the Twins in '84 for $44M and in '07 they were valued at $288M).

I understand that Twins' fans are angry and/or upset that management has made a decision that Santana is not worth the kind of money he is seeking, but to divert that anger to other teams who believe he is not worth that money PLUS sacrificing outstanding players who are under control for reasonable amounts of money makes no sense.

My advice to the Bleacher Bums. Stop whining about other teams and place your own team under the microscope. The "Santana Situation" has been created by the Twins, not by the flaws of baseball or BMTs exercising an unfair advantage. The Twins created the "Santana Situation.: An organization that, on the one hand, has determined that Santana is not worth the money to keep him in a Twins uniform while simultaneously telling other organizations that they should place an even higher value on the man to get him in their uniform.

And finally, this is not about the Twins not having enough money to keep Santana. The Twins offered 4 years and $80M and 5 years and $93M. $12M just came off their books from Torii Hunter's departure. Of that $12M in savings, they spent $3.82M to sign Monroe, $3.3M to sign Mike Lamb, and $2.8M on Adam Everett. If Santana is worth so much to the Twins, why don't they take that extra $2M and tack it onto each year of their previous offer and add a year. In essence, they would be telling Santana -- "hey, we understand you want 7 years and $150M and we offered 5 years just south of $100M, but why don't we split the difference."