WasWatching.com

This just keeps getting worse and worse. Damon still has range, but I'm sure he'll start cramping and tearing muscles within a month. But his arm is a problem. A big problem. It's literally the weakest arm I've ever seen. People with Giambi-like speed can go first to third on him. It's just an embarrassment.

I think Gardner is a real possibility if this happens because Melky didn't bring much power to the table and I think Gardner can match him offensively and brings along great base-stealing. Jackson will be starting in AA next year, so it's doubtful he shows up in the Bronx unless he's hitting like A-Rod. But if the Yanks don't sign a centerfielder than we'll probably be seeing him in the Bronx in '09 (unless they trade him, of course).

This is bad, but signing Rowand or Jones to a 5-year deal would make it a complete fiasco. So, if you believe everything Olney reports (seems like he was dead wrong about the Loretta rumor), at least we've got that going for us.

For the record, I'm still not liking any of this and am even more concerned that the "pitching prospect" discussed in this deal will turn out to be IPK or Horne.

The way Hank has folded, I wouldn't be surprised if A-Jack goes to the Twins as well.

Someone needs to slap some sense into the boy.

He's acting like a little kid whose tycoon dad is letting him "run" the factory for a day. Okay, dad, time to tell Little Hanky that play time's over.

And if Damon moves back to CF that means Matsui will cover LF most of the time, weakening 2 outfield positions.

Isn't one rumor that Jackson goes to the Twins in the trade?

This whole discussion of Santana makes me very nervous. I understand the view that a Santana for Hughes deal makes sense and that the others involved simply balance it out a bit, but since it almost certainly means committing 7 years to a 29 year old pitcher who showed some slippage this year it makes me nervous.

If course, if Boston gets him for what, in my view, is an inferior package that does not seriously affect their talent base, my guess is the price for Haren goes up since there is now one less serious suitor. So although the dollar value is better, the talent cost may be just as high for a less well-regarded pitcher.

I wonder if the Yankees could acquire Haren first for less than Santana putting pressure on Boston to get Santana even if they have to up the ante. Who would be more desperate in that case, Minnesota or Boston?

After throwing money at A-Freud, and the fourth year to Posada, meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

I'm not against Hughes in a deal for Santana. But any other top tier prospect, no. I'm certain that the Twins would prefer Austin Jackson to Melky. Too much then, too much.

According to MLBTraderumors (I know, I know), Kennedy's been added to the Melky/Hughes offer. If true, this has officially turned into:

A. An overbid
B. A pissing contest

Don't believe the bozo who wrote that Kennedy and Hughes are in the deal. He also said the Mets are reconsidering trading Reyes, which isn't true.

Can we stop calling this a bidding war and start calling it a fleecing? Who are the Yankees bidding against? NO ONE. The Sox STILL haven't moved off trading Ellsbury or Buchholz. How exactly is this a bidding war? The Sox say: "We don't want to trade our two best prospects; instead, you will accept a deal that includes a worthless centerfielder who can't hit and makes money." The Yankees counter with: "Yes, yes, yes, we'll give you whatever you want -- just give him to us already."

It's an absolute joke. It still makes no sense why the Yankees caved on Hughes. It's not like they couldn't revisit talks. What happened to the Brian Cashman who looked Boras in the eye during the Damon negotiations and made Boras blink? By folding on Hughes so early, they open themselves up to having to give up even more. Hughes should have been the final, last, dragged-it-from-their-fists move that got the deal done; not the START of a final deal.

This whole thing is a mess. If I was Cashman, I would ask Beane if Kennedy, Melky, Tabata and a few lesser pitchers/players were enough to get Haren. In that scenario, you either get the Twins to back off of Hughes or you end up with Haren, which would work out just fine.

The (original) Haren trade is a good comp for this trade, if you think about it: Haren was a stud prospect with a little major-league experience (he was actually good in the playoffs against the Sox while just a kid), but the Cardinals gave him up for Mark Mulder, who was a known commodity and blah, blah, blah. But here we are three years later and the workhorse Mulder had a bad year and then got hurt, and who's the better pitcher now? It's Haren without question. Santana is better than Mulder. But that doesn't mean it can't happen all over again. Not to mention that the Cards didn't have to pay Mulder 25 million dollars a year.

However this works out in the end, the Yanks are getting played to a ridiculous and embarrassing degree.

Well, I agree with you right now bailey, other than we do need to wait and see how this works out in the end. But if all the reports are true, the Yanks are getting played here.

Is it possible that the Yankees covet Kennedy more than Hughes though? We keep hearing Kennedy talked about like he's garbage, but the dude was a first round pick, drafted higher than Joba. I don't know, I hope they know what they're doing.

On a side note, when the Yankees traded for David Cone, were any of those guys the Yanks gave to Toronto legitimate prospects? The only baseball news I got back then was from USA Today and I can't remember how that deal was analyzed, but it seems like the word was the Yankees gave up some good talent. None of those guys panned out at all.

Well, they obviously don't covet Kennedy more because they were happy to give up Kennedy in the trade but had to have internal discussions about Hughes -- the fact that they considered NOT dealing Hughes in a deal for Johan Santana says all you need to know about Hughes and how they feel about him. I hope people aren't getting the impression that Kennedy is garbage. He's not. But he's not an ace. When he was drafted, his own agent called him a middle-of-the-rotation starter, and his stuff would say that's what he is.

I was a kid when the Cone deal went down and I don't know where those guys ranked, but I seriously doubt any of them were ever considered the best pitching prospect in baseball, which is what Hughes was last year.

People need to stop focusing on Damon's negatives and realize he's best utilized as a center fielder. Sure his arm becomes more of an issue in center, but he also gets to show off his range more. He's still at least a league-average hitter and his range is solidly above average. A weak arm isn't a good thing, but it doesn't kill his value. Conservatively, Damon's an average fielding center fielder overall and a league-average hitter. That's a 2.5 to 3.0 win player, about a win better than Melky.

True, Damon at peak strength trumps Melky in CF. But for how many games will his body hold up? Unfortunately, playing Damon in CF isn't the worst part of this trade. As mentioned above, if you package away Melky with Hughes (I can barely even write that without gagging), the dominoes really begin to fall. First, Damon is your permanent CF...which makes Matsui your everyday LFer - which, IMO, is worse than Damon in CF. Or, even worse, they go out and overpay for an aging FA.

I actually think that perhaps Melky is being undervalued here, because, although he's basically league average (and will have minimal value for the Twins), for the Yankees, he is EXTREMELY valuable.

I think the Yankees traded 3 players to Toronto, the biggest name being Marty Janzen who was a well-regarded pitching prospect but as I recall not even close to Hughes in anyone's estimation. I think the other two were B prospects at best, but am not sure.

I do not like the idea of the Yankees giving up 3 highly regarded prospects/players for 7 years of a 29 year old pitcher, no matter how good he is. I recognize the temptation and the Steinbrenner obsession with star power, but the risk is too great. Hughes is not established, but he has demonstrated he can pitch in the majors. It's not as if we are projecting purely from minor league stats now. And Austin Jackson may flop, of course, but he is the top hitting prospect in a system very thin in non-pitchers, and the only viable CF candidate within 2 years of the majors, unless you think Gardner remains possible.

But more than that, the notion that Hughes disappointed or is less of a prospect now is nonsense. Look at his minor league numbers. They are impeccable; there is not a hint of a red flag. And at every level he dominated. In 275 minor league innings he yielded 6 home runs, 5 in 1 season at AA. 66 walks, 311 Ks, .86 WHIP. Sure those numbers declined in his first season at age 21 in the majors with a relatively minor injury involved, but they remained pretty good even compared to experienced pitchers. He actually had a better ERA+ than Clemens did, admittedly in more innings, in his first season at the same age. There is as much chance that Hughes is a better pitcher than Santana even next year as there is that Santana remains a great pitcher or alternatively that Hughes flops as that Santana declines rapidly.