Post Trade Thoughts - Was acquiring Cliff Lee "worth" more to the Yankees.

by davelrogers on Jul 9, 2010 7:31 PM EDT

I would argue the Yankees had more to gain in a trade for Cliff Lee than most other teams in the league.

The Yankees are one of 6 or 7 teams that I assume will be in the market for Lee in the offseason. If the Yankees may make a potential $100 million dollar investment next year, in Lee, it seems more worth it to them to get an up close look. Trading for him now helps two fold:

1A. They get him for the playoffs and a world series run.

1B. They have a few months to see how he works between starts. Monitor the amount of hitters he studies. See if there are any red flags.

I realize he's a proven pitcher, but it may have given the Yankees some fresh ideas on how many years they would willing to sign him.

The Rays, and the Rangers for that matter, are probably are not in the market for him in the offseason. Everyone gets draft pick comp, but I think getting a look at your next possible massive investment could influence a GM to give up more in terms of prospects to get closer to that pitcher for a half season.

Who is in the market for him this offseason? Interested in your thoughts.

This post was written by a member of the DRaysBay community and does not necessarily express the views or opinions of DRaysBay staff.

Tweet Comment 11 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Too add to that, had the Yankee's gotten him they wouldn't have had to give up the draft pick compensation.

The caller said the boy, after removing the bulb from its socket, left the building and threw the bulb on the ground. When the bulb broke, the caller said the boy screamed "I am the cat and I am here to steal."

by Top Gun Numba 1 on Jul 10, 2010 10:12 AM EDT reply actions

I'm not sure that Montero < a late first round pick.

I think they’re better off like this, especially now that the rest of the league knows that Montero and fodder is almost worth one Cliff Lee.

And if one has a problem using stats to prove a point, then use your eyes.

by Sandy Kazmir on Jul 10, 2010 11:59 AM EDT up reply actions

It's just one factor home-boy.

1) Not losing the pick
2) Getting 1/2 season of production + playoffs
3) Getting a look at his workout habits.

by Top Gun Numba 1 on Jul 10, 2010 3:53 PM EDT up reply actions

I read about number 3 somewhere and it reeked of horrible journalism

I’d rather lose the 22-30th pick than Montero, an on-the-verge bat that may or may not stick at catcher. Number 2 is the most valid point and it’s a great one. Unfortunately for us, they probably don’t need him to be the best team in the game barring injury. Without CLee it just means that they’ll go after their only weakness, a RH LF-CF that gets most of his production on Wednesdays, home slice.

And if one has a problem using stats to prove a point, then use your eyes.

by Sandy Kazmir on Jul 11, 2010 10:05 AM EDT up reply actions

1B. They have a few months to see how he works between starts. Monitor the amount of hitters he studies. See if there are any red flags.

by Top Gun Numba 1 on Jul 11, 2010 10:35 AM EDT up reply actions

Apologies I spent most of yesterday in a variety of drinking establishments

And if one has a problem using stats to prove a point, then use your eyes.

by Sandy Kazmir on Jul 11, 2010 11:03 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions

They're giving up picks anyway

There’s no way they don’t sign a Type A this offseason.

Bad Left Hook - The SB Nation boxing blog
"Baseball is played on the field, not on a calculator."

by Brickhaus on Jul 10, 2010 4:37 PM EDT up reply actions

Again, it's a question of how many

by Top Gun Numba 1 on Jul 10, 2010 5:00 PM EDT up reply actions

Whether or not they give up a second round pick can't be a big consideration for them

Especially considering they go way over slot on guys who dropped to rounds 3 – 5 every year.

Bad Left Hook - The SB Nation boxing blog
"Baseball is played on the field, not on a calculator."

by Brickhaus on Jul 11, 2010 2:28 AM EDT up reply actions

I definitely agree

I think that trading for Cliff Lee would have given them an even better chance at resigning him in the offseason.

So most likely they weren’t just trading Montero for 3 months of Lee, but for 5.5 years of Lee. Makes the trade seem a lot better.

The Yankees also have the ability to lose a top prospect like Montero and overcome it by signing big money FA. A luxury that teams like the Rangers/Rays/Twins don’t have. So I think you could argue the opportunity cost of the next best option for the teams makes Montero much less valuable to the Yankees then a Smoak or Jennings to the Rangers or Rays.

Sonny's Baby Mamas - http://twitter.com/r_j_anderson/status/16590999556
http://twitter.com/jasoncollette/status/16590980428

by Sveet on Jul 10, 2010 12:37 PM EDT reply actions

The thing that sucks a little from a Rays point

is I’m expecting the Yankees to make a big push for Lee and Crawford in the offseason. If they sign both, that probably means there’s a decent chance the Rays are getting the Yankees’ 2nd round pick instead of their 1st rounder. That alone doesn’t mean I would have rather him gone to the Yankees, but just another little peice of the puzzle. I’m still holding out hope that the Angels or an NL team makes a big push for CC this offseason.

by ReyL on Jul 13, 2010 10:46 AM EDT reply actions