Dustin Pedroia bugs the hell out of me

I can't stand Dustin Pedroia.

The little Napoleon complex punk just gets under my sky. He and his partner in whine Kevin "I'm here to fix your pipes" Youkillis just seem to always be complaining about something. Schmucks.

However, as an objective baseball fan I can appreciate how good the little bastard is - and I can even admit to myself that, if he were wearing pinstripes rather than that ugly red uniform he currently owns, I would probably love him.

I actually don't have a problem with Pedroia winning the AL MVP this year, even though I probably would have voted for Joe Mauer simply because a catcher winning his second batting title has to count for something, right?

But here is what bothers the hell out of me in regards to Pedroia- why was voting for this little bum the noble and right thing to do, yet, two years ago, when Derek Jeter had a similar, if not superior year, and helped lead his team to a second half comeback that resulted in a division title, did he get snubbed?

Look at Pedroia's year: .326 17 83, with 118 runs, 213 hits, 54 doubles, 20 stolen bases, a .376 OBP and a .493 SLG. Very good numbers, numbers that were hailed as outstanding because of the player's stature and his style of game. His old-school approach was hailed as Pete Rose of the modern era.

Yet, look at Jeter's year in 2006: .343 14 97, with 118 runs, 214 hits, 39 doubles, 34 stolen bases, a .417 OBP and a .483 SLG. That's a better year than what Pedroia just put up by any measure, and when you add in to account the fact that Jeter posted that season during a year where the team lost BOTH their starting, All Star corner outfielders and suffered through A-Rod's worst statistcal year, it is even more impressive.

Jeter's year, however, was doomed because his power numbers weren't thought to be sufficient. Instead of being praised aas the true throw-back player he is, and rewarding him for playing the right kind of game in a era when so many have played it the wrong way, his season was picked apart as if it were somehow wanting.

As you can tell, the 06 snub really pissed me off.

Now, in 06 Justin Morneau, the first baseman for the Twins, won the award. This year, he came in second. His year in 06: .321 34 130 with 97 runs, 190 hits, 37 doubles, .375 OBP and a .559 SLG. This year: .300 22 129 with 97 runs, 187 hits, 47 doubles, .374 OBP, a .499 SLG.

Obviously, he had a better year in 06, but not by much. In fact, besides the homers and the SLG%, the numbers are pretty much the same. Yet, in 06, his year was hailed as exceptional. This year? His power numbers weren't given near the weight as they were when compared with Jeter.

I'm not trying to say that Pedroia didn't deserve the award this year. What I am saying is that Jeter, off of a better year in 06, was seemingly penalized for the same things that earned Pedroia praise this year. Whereas Jeter's lack of power numbers were disparaged, Pedroia's little man act was commended. Whereas Jeter's leadership skills and intangibles were largely ignored, Pedroia's stewardship of the clubhouse was revered. Why, in only two short years, did the writers decide that the qualities such qualities were redeeming rather than detrimental?

All of that info leads to this point: there is an obvious double standard and bias against the Yankees that exists and that, more than anything else in my mind, contributed to Jeter being snubbed for a second time (he should have won the 1999 MVP).

It is sad because Jeter is quickly getting older and may not have another 06 type of year in him. Now, he is a first ballot hall of famer with or without an MVP, but it doesn't negate the fact thaat Jeter has played the game the right way for 13 years now and instead of being acknowledged for it, he has been penalized.

One week in to free agency and it is already crazy time........

Phil Rodgers of the Chicago Tribune decided to take a break from covering Chi-Town news and, instead, focused on the Bronx Bombers this weekend - asking what the Yanks would do if they struck out on ALL their pitching free agent targets.

There are a couple of things I want to say about this. First, it is pretty apparent that sports writers all across America have less and less reliable sources. If they had people whispering in their ear on a more consistent basis, we would see less useless columns like this one by Rodgers. The beauty of Rodger's column is that it offers NO insight or new information. For those of you who don't want to click on the link, I'll sum up for you what he said: CC Sabathia really likes California and would prefer to stay there; AJ Burnett will have a lot of suitors; Derek Lowe will probably be option A for the Red Sox and he seems to like them as well; and if the Yanks don't get any of those three, coupled with Mussina leaving and Pettitte getting older, they are gonna be in a world of hurt.

No, Rodgers doesn't offer any rumors or opinions as to what the Yanks WOULD do in such a circumstance, which would seem to be the only value of writing such a column, right? I mean, if you have no new information, such as a "source" saying that Sabathia has turned down the Yankees or that the lefty has no interest in playing in New York no matter what, then you would think you would be able to offer some ideas as to what the Yanks next move would be in case of armageddon, no? That, for Rodgers, seemed to be too taxing. So all we are left with is "the Yanks will be screwed if everyone scoffs at their offer." Brilliant.

Second, and more importantly, why is everyone, not just Rodgers, flipping out about Sabathia and the fact that he has not accepted the Yankee's offer as of yet? Take a moment, if you will, and put yourself in CC's shoes: this is the largest, longest contract you are EVER going to sign in your life. This decision will essentially plant you in a specific town for the next 6-10 years. You just became a free agent LAST WEEK and, so far, have received a record breaking offer from the most storied team in sports history. Wouldn't you wait at least a week or two to see what other offers come in, whether the Yanks are willing to increase their offer, or at least mull over your decision before you sign on the dotted line? I mean, really, doesn't that seem reasonable? Doesn't it seem as if any one of us would take a little time before jumping at an offer? Again, we are talking about A WEEK!!!!!!!!

Also, what is shocking to me is that no one seems to be discussing the fact that none of these teams, NONE of them, have made an official offer to Sabathia as of yet. If it is this forgone conclusion that Sabathia actually doesn't want to play for the Yanks, and would consider a deal far less lucrative to stay in the NL and/or on the west coast, why wouldn't one of these teams (the Giants, Dodgers, or Angels) jump at the opportunity to nab the best free agent pitcher on the market? They have all remained quiet. Why?

Well, let me do a little bit of my own speculation: wouldn't it be plausible that none of those teams have offered contracts because a.) they know that Sabathia will ultimately take the higher offer from the Yanks and don't want to be played by team CC as they try to increase the offer and/or b.) each one of them has other goals this offseason that don't include CC and they aren't going to become distracted by a free agent that, chances are, they can't sign anyway.

The Dodgers are going to inevitably come back to the table with Manny, and most people believe that they will sign him to a three or four year deal for boat loads of cash. That would take them well out of any running for Sabathia. The Angels? Obviously, their #1 concern is Teixeira, who will come with his own $160+ million price tag. They aren't signing two guys for that kinda cash. The Giants? Please, they would have to move Barry Zito to even think about signing CC and who is taking that contract off their hands? They need hitting help, not pitching help.

Instead of focusing on why Sabathia hasn't signed with the Yanks, the focus should be on WHY these other teams, you know, the ones CC is supposedly clamoring to sign with, haven't made an official offer to the young man. If you use a little logic, I think it is pretty easy to figure out.

Sabathia is weighing waiting on other teams to get involved and the only way he can do that is to sit on the Yankee's offer. He can also only attract other teams to the negotiating game if he makes it seem that he is willing to leave MILLIONS on the table. There is not one report out there that indicates any other team's interest in going as high as the Yankees for CC.

My prediction? Sabathia either signs with the Yanks this week or early next week.

Random Thoughts -

*Last weekend I got in to a pretty heated discussion with a friend of mine about college football. He, as a Notre Dame grad, is a HUGE CFB fan. Me, not so much, and my contention was that college football just isn't competitive enough on a week-to-week basis. My friend disagreed, insisting that, if you looked at college basketball and college football, there was similar parity.

Well, look at this weekend. Florid scored 70 points in their victory and several teams won by at least 30 points. Now, can you think of another sport where, in the final weeks of the season, you have such lopsided games with teams having NO CHANCE at victory? In college basketball, these types of gimme games are over and done with by the end of December. Once you hit January you have conference games and good out-of-conference schedules to deal with. Do you think you're gonna see 35 point blow outs in the Big East this year come the end of February? No chance.

The fact that, in almost any given year you can challenge the legitimacy of the college football champion (and with Texas Tech losing this week, and Penn State winning huge, you are going to have yet another controversy on your hands this year) makes the sport less than credible on my eyes, but in terms of watchability, for me, I can't get past the fact that the level of competition is, for the most part, horrid. How can I take Florida seriously when, down the stretch of their season, they are scheduling teams that are 60 points worse than them?

*Sticking with the college football theme, is there any doubt now that Charlie Weis is not a very good coach? I mean, what exactly is the man's excuse? His team, with a TERRIBLE schedule, is 6-5 and is heading towards a beating (again) at the hands of USC next weekend. These are his players, right? Clausen isn't a freshman any more, but rather a second year man that should be ripping the league apart, correct? Those great recruiting classes should be showing some real signs of greatness right about now, no?

My buddy, the ND grad, has turned on Weis (well before the Syracuse game) but is still convinced that, next year, the team will win 10 games. He is sort of in a little candyland world with that idea. Even with an "easy" schedule, this team is simply a 7 or maybe 8 win team, at the most. Their players just aren't that good, case closed, and Weis has proven to be just as bad a coach as Bob Davie or Tyrone Willingham, both of whom have been villified around South Bend.

Personally, while I don't take any great pleasure in watching someone else suffer, I do have to admit that there is a certain satisfaction watching both Notre Dame and Charlie Weis fall off the face of the earth. ND and their alumni act as if their school is this pillar of righteousness - a beacon of morality for the rest of the world - and that their struggles stem directly from their incredible standards. ND grads truly believe that their football and/or basketball players would be splitting atoms and developing new, innovative surgical procedures if it wasn't for football practice and travel schedules. Watching such overtly elitest, arrogant, upity rich kids suffer as their once revered program falls more and more into obscurity is gratifying, just as it is watching Weis, an arrogant, self-absorbed assh*le get left out to dry and have his job in real jeopardy. Weis went all over America patting himself on the back after his first year at ND, in which they looked like a team that might challenge year in and year out for BCS prominence. He did it on the shoulders of someone elses players, but that didn't stop him from writing a book, doing the talk-show circuit, and telling everyone how much of a genius he was.

Reports also began to surface about his boarish behavior and about how unseamly his actions and antics could be. His rotundness was convinced of his own importance and evidently didn't feel shy about putting people in their rightful place - standing directly behind or underneath him. Now?

All of South Bend wants the man's head on a stick. The love affair is over, and Weis spends much of his time answering questions about his team's poor performance. What a shame. It is always sad when someone so vial is taken down about 20 pegs, isn't it?

Bye Bye Moose........you really grew on me

In the 2000 offseason the Yankees signed Mike Mussina, the ace of the Baltimore Orioles staff who, by age 32, was a model of pitching excellence and consistency. I was all on board for the move. Pitching wins championships and the Yanks had just rattled off three straight championship years on the shoulders of their starting pitching and strong bullpen. In those years, the rule of thumb was that, if the Yanks scored 5 runs, the game was over because their pitchers would never allow the other team to eclipse that margin.

But, I have to admit, the first two seasons Mussina was a Yankee I was not very impressed. The record was fine, and his penchant for being better in the second half than the first half showed he had the big-game chops to deal with NYC, but there was something about his particular nature that bugged the hell out of me.

If you gave Mussina a perfect June afternoon, with little wind, no clouds, and an umpire that was calling a good game, he could brilliant. On those days he was like a professor, mixing and matching his pitches to keep the other team off balance. But, if you threw a wrinkle in there, Mussina would always just seem completely out of sorts.

If the weather wasn't good, if the umpire had an erratic strikezone, or if, God forbid, Mussina were forced to deviate from his normal routine and pitch on, say, 3 days rest of 6 days rest, chances were you were in for a sub-par outing.

That annoyed the hell out of me, to be honest.

Then, 2003 came along and the Yankees entered the first of what would become back-to-back epic ALCS matchups with the Red Sox. In my opinion, it was one of the great all-time series, with everything from one-run nail-biting games to a brawl that reveals how much the two teams actually disliked one another.

In game seven the Yanks found themselves down by 4 runs in the fourth inning with men on first and third with one out. Pedro Martinez was on the mound for the Sox and a 4 run lead already seemed insurmountable. Any more and the Yanks would be dead, beaten by their long-time rival on their home field.

Mussina was brought in from the bullpen to get out of the jam. He had never done anything like this before. It was out of his comfort zone. It was outside of his normal routine and, as I watched him warm up, I was convinced that he would spit the bit. It played into my own little narrative perfectly.

Instead, Mussina saved the inning, the game, and the series. He immediately recorded a strikeout and a double play, keeping the game at a 4-run deficit, and followed that up with two-plus scoreless innings after that. He was the brick wall the Yanks needed, keeping the contest within range of a comeback and, as everyone remembers, comeback they did, culminated by the Aaron Boone homer off of Time Wakefield in the 11th inning - one of the most dramatic homers in history.

From that moment on my perspective changed on Mussina. He had shown me the guts of a champion. He had showed that, when his team called on him, even when it was WAY outside his comfort zone, he was able to not just perform, but perform at a high, high level.

Mussina would go on to be the Yanks most consistent pitcher during an unusual time for the Yanks. He would never win a championship, despite getting to the big dance twice, and he would watch as the Yanks went from championship caliber to second-tier team unable to make it out of the first round of the playoffs year after year. He would become a vocal leader of the team, willing to speak his mind and say the things most athletes avoid. His interviews were always interesting and informative, revealing more than the cliche-filled rhetoric routinely spewed by athletes looking to protect their image. While Mussina was about as honest a baseball player as there ever has been, I can't remember one overtly controversial thing he said that led to weeks of distractions for the team, showing that an intelligent baseball player can be upfront with the media without producing negative headlines.

Much of the talk about Mussina now focuses on his Hall of Fame credentials. If I had a vote, mine would be yes for two very simple reasons: one, he is as consistent a pitcher as ever walked the face of the earth, winning 270 games while only losing 153. Second, he did that while pitching his ENTIRE career in the AL East and pitching in the steroid era. If you are going to annoint Curt Schilling or John Smoltz, both of whom have won less games and pitched most of their career in the NL, then, in my opinion, you have to annoint Mussina as well. In my opinion, had Mussina pitched in the NL the vast majority of his career, not having to deal with the big lineups and small parks offered up in the AL East, he would probably have a few 20-win seasons and 300 wins by now, and we wouldn't need to have this discussion.

But the debate will rage and Mussina's fate will lie in the hands of writers who routinely show their absolute stupidity when it comes to such votes.

To mea, it doesn't matter whether he makes the Hall or not. Mussina will always be a great pitcher and one I will remember very fondly. His unique intelligence and personality were never more on display than this last week when, after winning 20 games, he stepped away. How many other players could do such a thing? History tells us only one has - Sandy Koufax - and he did so because his arm was so battered and bruised he could no longer take the pain.

Mussina looked at his career the way an objective fan might, realizing that his 20 win season and perfect health were probably exceptions to the rule going forward. Would he come back and be as successful next year as he was this year? Probably not. But think of how much it must take a person to admit that to themselves? Athletes are usually the LAST to know they are done. Mussina, in that sense, may have been the first.

I hope, for the game's sake, that Mussina eventually returns in some capacity. I, personally, would love to see him try his hand at broadcasting, where I think Mussina would be excellent, offering honest assesments with insight and humor. Is there any doubt that Mussina could break down a pitcher and a game better than anyone?

But chances are the quiet Mussina will retreat to his Pennsylvania home, take care of his kids, start some small company to occupy his time, and enjoy his new life. And, hopefully, one day he will deliver a speech on the steps of Cooperstown.
I wish him nothing but the best and, while it seemed as if I would never say such a thing early on, I will truly miss the man. He was a Yankee, no questions asked.

Now the ball is in CC's court.......

The word is six years, $140 million.

That's supposedly what the Yanks have offered CC Sabathia - their initial bid to bring the lefty in.

I can't imagine anyone else coming close to that number so, honestly, I think it is probably just a matter of time. I just can't imagine that the siren call of the west coast is so great that CC would leave anywhere between $20 to $30 million on the table.

I fully expect team Sabathia to do their due diligence, shop the offer around, and potentially squeeze another year, or a few million more out of the Steinbrenners, but with this "shock and awe" strategy I think it is pretty obvious that the Yanks want this ended right here and right now.

Okay, so let's make this leap of faith and assume that CC, after a bit of negotiating, signs on the dotted like and gets himself a nice XXXL Pinstripe jersey for Christmas. Where next?

In my last post I already laid out my belief that the Yanks can't just simply ignore the starting lineup now that they have brought in Nick Swisher. I would still love for them to pursue Mark Teixeira but I have a sneaky suspicion that Mark will be back with the Angels next year, so that would leave the Yanks with some trade options. I think they could get something done by dangling an Ian Kennedy, a Melky Cabrera, even a Johnny Damon in some sort of three-way deal, and could get themselves a corner outfielder. I think it would take Phil Hughes to pry Nate McClouth away from the Pirates and, if the Yanks weren't willing to give up Hughes for Johan Santana last year, how could they justify doing it for a nice, but not franchise-changing player like McClouth? Instead, I think the Yanks could pry an Andre Ethier or Jeremy Hermida away from an NL team, go with Gardner in center, and call it a day. Oh, and one more thing.........Mike Cameron is not the answer, I'm sorry. Please don't blow prospects on Mike Cameron simply because you want to "hold a spot" for Austin Jackson in another year. I would rather have Gardner out there and a very good corner outfielder than have Cameron out there, whose only claim to fame will be that he "doesn't cost much" and "isn't under contract past this year." Please, this is not the NBA. Having expiring contracts is not gold. They need to get younger, they need to give Gardner a chance, and if EVERYONE works out, then you deal with what to do with Jackson next year, if he is even ready for the jump.

The more interesting question is what the Yanks plan to do with Andy Pettitte. It seems odd to me that there has been no movement on the Pettitte front. Instead, the Yanks seem to be waiting to make offers to BOTH Burnett and Lowe. Why?

First, I think Lowe is going to end up back with Boston. They seem to really want him, he would solidify that rotation, he knows the city, and word is he would like to go back to Beantown. The Sox, if they truly do want him, will make him an offer at or comparable to the Yanks. I see offering Lowe a contract and running up the price on the Sox, that seems to be a favorite past-time of both GM, but I don't have a lot of faith that Lowe will be a Bomber next year. Burnett, I think, is more likely, even though I am a little skeptical about his desire to come to the bright lights of NYC. Remember, he has played for Florida and Toronto, about as small market as it gets, and he is best friends with Carl Pavano. That fact alone should tell you a little about the man's character and I can't imagine that Pavano would be glowing in his recommedation for NY. But the Yanks seem to be smitten with Burnett and my guess is they may be willing to go higher than anyone else to land him. As with CC, it is hard to contemplate money not singing the final song for any of these free agents.

Pettitte didn't end the season very well at all, but Andy is still a proven veteran who knows NY and I believe has a lot left in the tank. Instead of bringing Andy back as a two or even three, you would be bringing him back as a four, even a five. That takes a lot of pressure off of him to perform at a HIGH level throughout the course of the year. If you look at Andy's numbers and compare them to back-end rotation guys from around the league, he is easily in the top percent, and one would have to assume that Pettitte would be able to rebound somewhat.

Look, I understand that sentimentality never won a game in any sport, but I don't think signing Pettitte is strictly a case of nostalgia. He is a lefty, he still has years left in the tank, and he provides veteran leadership. Plus, Pettitte is only going on a year-by-year basis right now and, if the Yanks are as set in their belief that Phil Hughes will prove to be as good as first imagined, doesn't it makes sense to bring back Pettitte, over either Burnett or Lowe?

This year, the Yanks watched Mike Mussina, who the world believed to be washed up, win 20 games for the first time in his career and be masterful from April to September. No one would expect such a performance from Pettitte, but is there any doubt that he could have such a resurgence, considering he is a lefty, and he is younger than Mussina?

If I had MY way, here would be the Yankee starting rotation for next year: CC Sabathia, Chien Mien Wang, AJ Burnett, Andy Pettitte, Joba Chamberlain. Two lefties, three guys under 30, and all proven winners, except for Joba. That's a winning five right there to me, with the likes of Hughes and/or Kennedy (whichever one isn't traded), Aceves, Chase Wright, or Dan McCutchen waiting in the wings in case of injury. Again, depth is what wins, and Pettitte gives depth, winning attitude, and veteran leadership, along with a desire to prove himself after a down year. Here's to hoping the Yanks do the right thing and bring him back.

I am a freakin genius..........but what does it mean?

Okay, so a few days after I post my post making the case for Nick Swisher, the Yankees trade for him, just proving what we all already knew..............Brian Cashman is a "From The Free Seats" junky, getting all his best ideas from deep inside my mind. Keep reading Brian and I'll make that extension you just got seem like a bargain to the Yanks over the next three years.

But now that the Yanks have brought Swisher on, what does that mean for the future?

Everyone's first reaction was to immediately nix the "Yankees to pursue Teixeira" rumors, suggesting that Nick the Not So Quick will secure first in 2009 and the Bombers will look to spend their money elsewhere. Not so fast my little compadres.

Swisher has played considerable time at both first and in the outfield, spending much of the last year patroling center for the White Sox. Now, Brian Cashman admitted today in a conference call with reporters that Swisher is probably not Willie Mays out in center, but Cash described Swisher as being a "plus defender" at both first and the corner outfield spots. What does that mean? Well, what it means to me is, with a little clever manuvering, the Yanks could easily sign Teixeira and move Swisher to either left or right field, depending on where the team feels Nady is the most comfortable. Of course, that would require the team to send Johnny Damon packing, but it would seem to me that the Yanks could find a team to partner with if they decided that Damon could fetch them something on the open market. That would allow the team to completely revamp, al but ensuring that one of the oldest and most brittle teams in the league would have a full injection of youth, with an under 30 outfield and right side of the infield.

In that scenario, the Yanks would probably go with a lineup such as Gardner, Jeter, Teixeira, A-Rod, Matsui, Swisher, Posada, Nady, Cano. That would be too bad at all. Now, of course, you could play with that, and potential put Jeter as your leadoff guy, move Cano to the 2 hole, and stick Gardner in the 9 hole, but those would be your principal players.

Okay, now I believe that it seems, at least from the reports, that the Angels are IN LOVE with Teixeira, somewhat like the Yankees love affair with CC Sabathia, and I have a feeling that they are going to make Tex an offer that will at the very least be right at the number the Yanks would be willing to go. What does that mean? It means that, unless Tex really didn't like his stay in L.A., I have a hard time seeing hime switch cities, especially when the Angels are gonna be a very good team for a very long time to come. He knows the city, he knows the players, and I have to imagine he enjoyed playing for Mike Scoscia. Maybe the Yanks entice him, and maybe their interest is a little higher than people believe, but, to me the smart money is on the Angels getting Tex to stay.

So that would mean the Yanks would be done with their lineup, right?

Back it up there smoky.............again, to me, if the Yanks are TRULY committed to remaking this team, stopping at Swisher would be a mistake. If the Yanks sign CC, which seems to be a distinct possibility given how much they are willing to give him, and they bring back a healthy Pettitte, the starting rotation should be just fine heading in to next year, even if they don't sign a second starter. That would leave them with their ENTIRE cache of prospects to look for a more formidable bat. You could take Ian Kennedy and package him eiwht some other nice pieces from the minors and perhaps get yourself a good corner/center fielder. I have been promoting Andre Ethier for a while now. He is young, he has terrific skills, and he has the ability to play center. He is like a gazelle out in the field, and the only reason he would be available from the Dodgers is because they have a back-log of outfielders. The team truly believes that Matt Kemp is destined to be a STAR, not just a really, really nice player like Ethier. Or maybe the Yanks look to do something similar to what they just did with Swisher and buy low on a guy like Jeremy Hermida. I think Hermida would be a hard get at this point, with the Marlins just having traded away both Josh Willingham and Mike Jacobs, but they may be inclined to shed another underperforming player in Hermida. Remember, just two years ago Hermida was hitting a robust .296 with 18 homers and 63 RBI in just 123 games. It looked like the youngster was about to take off and then 2008 came and everything turned bad. Could Hermida regain that form and be a up-and-coming star once again? Considering any price for him would conceivably be low, it might not be such a bad idea.

The point is, as much as I like the Swisher deal it should not be an excuse for Cashman to now ignore the rest of the lineup. The outfield should be improved, and if that means trading Damon a year before they plan on letting him go anyway, so be it. Teixeira could still be in the cards for this team, as could a trade for a young, talented outfielder.

Whatever the decision, I do believe it would be a real, real mistake for Cashman to ignore the offense and put all of his hopes on bounce back performances from the likes of Cano, Matsui and Posada.

The case for Nick Swisher, and some other news and notes............

Let me get this out of the way first: I still believe Mark Teixeira is the best possible option at first base for the Yanks. Every writer with a byline has laid out what Teixeira brings to the table and, quite honestly, if you are a Yankee fan and you are NOT on board with Tex manning first starting next year then you either care way, way, way too much about The Steinbrenners' checking account balance or have bought into this new "everyone who wasn't brought through the Yankee system is evil" mentality that has been promoted by Brian Cashman and certain members of the media.

The notion that the Yanks could lose BOTH Giambi and Abreu and NOT replace one of them with a big bat would seem to be OVERLY optomistic at best and moronic at worst.

Every other option should be considered option B when it comes to first, in my opinion.

However, signing Tex is no guarantee. While the Yanks seem willing to basically hand CC Sabathia a blank check and say "write a number down big guy," they seem to be a little more budget conscious when it comes to first. That means the Angels, Dodgers and, yes, even the Red Sox might offer Tex similar or more lucrative offers than the Bombers before the end of the year.

So, if they don't sign Teixeira, where do they go?

I have advocated a couple of different moves here on this blog, from the logic-defying idea of bringing Nick Johnson and his 131 broken bones back to the Yanks to trading for the likes of a Jeremy Hermida and either moving the talented youngster to first OR putting him in he outfield and moving Nady to first (a moot point now that the Marlins traded Mike Jacobs).

But by far the most interesting name floated out there has been Nick Swisher.

The White Sox obviously want to get rid of Swisher, and considering his somewhat high contract and absolutely dreadful year (he batted .219), it would seem that the 28-year old could be had for a compliment and a Coca Cola.

Here is what Swisher would bring to the Yanks: a good defensive first baseman who has the flexibility to also play the outfield (he played a lot in center for the Sox this year). A switch hitter who ALWAYS has an OBP at or close to .400. A guy with pop who has hit 20+ homers for five straight years now. Proven success in larger, pitcher ball-parks that would seem to bode well for a move to Yankee Stadium and, most importantly, the AL East, which has almost all hitters parks. A veteran track record at a relatively young age, meaning that he might have some room to get better (remember, he is a former number1 draft pick with a lot of talent). And, finally, a chip or two on his shoulder after a terrible year where he seemed to fail under the direction of Ozzie Guillen.

If Swisher could just return to the form of two years ago, where he batted .262 with 22 homers and 76 RBI while missing 12 games overall and walking 100 times while getting on base at a .381 clip, would make him a valuable player on the Yanks, and if he ever returned to his 2006 form, where he belted 35 homers and drove in 98 RBI, he could be a steal. Regardless, he could provide a better option at first than ANYONE else the team currently has on the roster at a discounted price of probably some B prospects.

The problems with Swisher?

The truth is Swisher could be closer to the .219 hitter he was this year than the .262 he was in 07, and if that were the case, and Swisher were collapse even more, and his power numbers diminish by any amount, no matter how small, it would make him a liabilty for the Bombers. Also, unless Swisher matched his career year in 2006, his addition would not solidify a starting lineup that is going to have to reshuffle in order to replace their third and fifth place hitters from a year ago. Swisher would seem to add another unknown to an equation filled with question marks (how Posada responds after surgery, does Matsui have much power left, can Nady be a legit middle-of-the-order threat, will Cano become a middle-of-the-order threat, etc....) It would be hard to imagine that the yanks would feel comfortable with a potential lineup of Damon, Jeter, Cano, A-Rod, Matsui, Posada, Nady, Swisher, Gardner, does it? I mean, that lineup has the POTENTIAL to be pretty good, but it also has the potential to have the Yanks shopping for a bat come July 31st in 09.

Like I said, I still believe Teixeira is option A for this team, and should be, but unlike Sabathia, who I fully expect the Yanks to sign, I am much less optomistic about Tex. If that is the case, I would really love to see the Yanks nab Swisher. I just have a sense that Swisher could end up being a Mike Lowell-esque type player for the team - a guy taken off the proverbial scrap heap and turned into a very good, clutch player and a fan favorite.

*Peter Abraham had a note for all us Ian Kennedy doubter's the other day. It seems the righty from Cali pitched 4 strong innings in the Puerto Rican Winter League, striking out 5 and walking, I believe, none. This, I guess, is suppose to prove that Kennedy is well on his way to becoming Greg Maddux and Tom Glavine combined.

I love Abraham, but his defense of both Hughes and Kennedy borders on the comical. Is he related to these two guys? Was he made fun of a lot on blogs as a small beat writer and has pent-up hostility against message board writers? When you are literally bragging about how someone performed in Puerto Rican winter ball, there is something going on here beyond reasoned journalistic logic. Shouldn't ANY half-way decent pitcher be able to pitch well in Puerto Rican winter ball?And is 4 strong innings ALL that is required now for a pat on the back? Really?

The truth is the Yanks would be FOOLISH not to trade Kennedy this offseason if his value remains high. Could he be a solid MLB pitcher? Sure, he is young and has some talent. But is there anyone who watches him and believes he is gonna be special? I doubt it.

If the Yanks could package him for a good, young, athletic outfielder, that would be terrific. The kid is a middle to low end pitcher in the making. If someone wants to give up a valuable piece to see if they can get #3 starter talent out of him, so be it, bully for them. Kennedy is not the type of talent you hang on to at all costs.

*What the hell is taking Mike Mussina so freakin long to announce his retirement?

Moose is an intelligent guy, no question. If he wants to think this decision over, so be it. But, seriously, Moose told EVERYONE he was ready to retire during the season. Has he really had such a pronounced change of heart?

Mussina had one of the more amazing seasons in baseball history this year, but I think the smartest thing for him, and the best thing for the Yanks, could be for him to move on. Pettitte makes much more sense as a veteran signing than Mussina, who has said that "if I come back for one, I am coming back for three" to try and pursue 300 wins.

I know Moose wants to make the right choice for himself here, but seriously, let's get a move on. Announce and move on. I am sure that's what the Yanks would like to see happen.

*Is there one reporter in baseball that has access to ANYONE in the Yankee front office because it seems somewhat odd to me that, here on Nov. 9, there have been almost NO reports as to who the Yankees will focus on and what their options may be. We all know the big man, CC Sabathia, is object # 1, but what about Teixeira? Are the Yanks REALLY interested or not? Have no idea. What if the Yanks don't land Sabathia, who are their next two options? No idea. What about trades, who are the Yankees targeting right now? I haven't heard any hard rumors, only speculation by reporters looking over the baseball landscape and surmising whether it makes sense.

Could someone PLEASE call Hank Steinbrenner? I need some information, even if it's wrong.

I am not getting this...........

Okay, Hank Steinbrenner spoke up this weekend, bringing the number of useless, idiotic interviews to approximately 6,000 in less than a year of being "in charge" of the New York Yankees.

Fredo, according to Peter Abraham's blog (the best on the net) said that the Yanks would be interested in Manny Ramirez. Hank the Tank described Manny as a "free spirit" and praised the slugger for being one of the best hitters in history. On that, Little Stein is certainly correct, but it still doesn't answer the question as to why the Yanks would truly be interested in the ageing, moody left fielder. Haven't we been down this road before? Hasn't signing the likes of Manny been the problem in the past?

Now, anything Hank says should be treated like, well, Hank Steinbrenner said it, meaning it should be laughed at and then pretty much discarded as worthless. But Ken Davidoff had a similar report today in Newsday, citing Yankee insiders suggesting that the team was more likely to sign Manny than Mark Teixiera when all is said than done. Again, reports that come from "Yankee insiders" should be treated with the same amount of skepticism as the Fredo Steinbrenner proclamations, but I think it's worth looking at both moves and comparing and contrasting.

Manny Ramirez:

Pros - When Hank called Manny one of the great hitters in the game he was downplaying what the guy can do at the plate. Love him or hate him, Manny is one of the most prolific hitters in the history of the game. As a Yankee fan, can you think of another player who instilled sich fear when he came to the plate? Big Papi has certainly killed the Yanks in his time with the Red Sox, but even at his best Papi was only as intimidating as Manny. The guy is almost automatic in big moments. He is simply a machine and, if he were given the opportunity to beat up on the Red Sox 19 times a year, do you have any doubt that his average would rival what he did against the Yanks all those years? He would make it his mission, especially next year, to pound on the Sox every chance he got.

Last year, the Yankee offense suffered in large part due to the ineffectiveness the Yanks displayed with runners in scoring position. No one was particularly good in those moments, but the middle of the lineup (A-Rod and Giambi) were especially brutal. Manny would immediately make the Yanks middle of the lineup virtually impossible to handle. If A-Rod were to regain the same form he had in 2007, and Manny were simply Manny, Jeter and Damon could both score 120 runs. The offense would be amazing.

Also, Manny would be energized to play in New York that first year and be primed to play against his old team. His motivation would be high, the same as it was when he first got to L.A., and I have no doubt the man would put up gigantic numbers in 2009.

Cons - Manny isn't a spring chicken. He is 36 years old. Eventually, he is going to start to show his age, even if it's a little bit. Now, there is a good chance that Manny doesn't start to decline for another two years or so, butManny is gonna probably want a contract that takes him to the end of his career, perhaps as many as four years from some other team, and that kind of contract, one that would take him to 40 and beyond, just wouldn't make any sense at all.

If the Yanks are truly interested in taking a different route to success, wouldn't Manny be exactly the SAME kinda move that's gotten them in trouble before? An ageing player signed to a long term contract who will produce at the lowest levels of their career, no matter how productive, would seem to be symptomatic of the mistakes the Yanks have made for so many years. At a time when the Yanks are professing a commitment to youth and change, how could they justify a "business as usual" signing, even for the quality of player such as Manny?

But there are other, less obvious reasons why this move wouldn't make sense.

Conclusion - There is no doubt in my mind that Manny could be exceptional for at least one year, but Manny being Manny is a catch phrase in baseball circles for a reason. With a multi-year contract, the problems Manny had in Boston would show up in New York. There would be lack of hustle moments. There would be loss of concentration. There would be times when Manny would show up at the ballpark with some strange knee issue or hammy pull and refuse to play. Now, everyone has raved about Manny as a teammate, but can you honestly imagine that kind of mentality playing in a clubhouse with Derek Jeter, Jorge Posada, and Mariano Rivera? And does Joe Girardi, who obviously had a slew of problems transitioning from the Joe Torre era to his new way of doing things, really need an attitude like Manny in that clubhouse? Can you imagine Girardi's reaction the first time Manny throws to the wrong base, or forgets how many outs there are, or hits a ball he thinks is going out and ends up on first base because he didn't run out the play? Can you imagine how much more gauling it will be for G.I. Joe when Manny comes back to the dugout laughing about his latest mistake?

Then, there is the Robinson Cano factor. The Yanks seem hell-bent on retaining Cano, believing the second baseman is still a star in the making, despite his bad season. Cano's major problem is his lack of concentration and it is hard for me to believe that having Manny on the team would be a positive influence on him. Cano needed a coach like Larry Bowa on him from day one last year and, when that didn't happen, he fell off. Can you imagine Manny being Manny around Cano? Can you imagine those two forming a bond? It is hard to see how the Yanks could bring Cano back from that, isn't it?

Manny just doesn't make a whole heck of a lot of sense for the Yanks. For the Dodgers, who need that big bat in the middle and have the clout of Torre to handle the situation, if seems perfect, but not for the Yanks. The team needs younger, more dynamic players to build a new core around, and despite his incredible abilities, Manny doesn't fit that bill.

Mark Teixiera:

Pros - This is a pretty long list so let's start with the basics: he's 28 years old, meaning that, if you committed to him for 8 years he would only be 36 at the end of the contract (the same age Manny is now). He's a switch hitter. He's a gold glove caliber third baseman. He's had 30 or more home runs the last five years. He bats at or over .300 every year. His OBP, SLG, and OPS are all well above average. He plays almost every day. And, this year, in the postseaon against the Red Sox, he batted .467 with a .550 OBP.

He has also proven to be very clutch, hitting .308 with runners in scoring position this year and batting a whopping .352 in close and late situations. That would certainlu seem to be the type of resume you would want to add to the middle of your lineup.

Cons - Honestly, all I can see as a con here is the money and the years. The Yanks seem to be hesitant to commit to Teixiera at the expected asking price (somewhere in the neighborhood of 10 years, $200 million). I can understand that. First, the Yanks have been paying through the nose on both luxury tax and revenue sharing for years. The amount of money they hand over to MLB every year is actually obscene (a perfect example of a socialist mindset when it comes to economics). If the Yanks wanted to scale back their payroll, how could anyone really argue?

Also, let's face it, the Yanks are more than likely not completely recession proof here. If you have a pulse, you know the economy aint exactly sparkling right now. Baseball, and the Yankees, can fool themselves into believeing the national pastime won't be hurt by this recession, but that would seem to be a dream. Eventually, people are going to begin to cut back everywhere, and someone who was excited at the prospect of attending a game in the new Yankee Stadium next year might put those plans on hold, especially considering the outrageous and somewhat absurd prices the Yankees plan to demand for an opportunity to see their team perform.

With starting pitching being the Yanks number one concern, and with the team seemingly ready to offer CC Sabathia a "you'd be an idiot to turn us down" kind of offer, I can see the logic in the Yanks deciding that two giant contracts would be wrong headed.

Conclusion - As I said, everyone can understand a business addressing financial concerns in this economic market, but the Yanks are asking A LOT of their fans in these trying times, raising ticket prices and making it more and more difficult for the average consumer to attend games. In light of that, and considering that, eventually, the economy will rebound, it would seem to me to be hypocritical of the Yankee brass to start the corner cutting this year, tightening the straps as they ask their fans to commit more to the cause. Even if the financial burden becomes more extreme, it is hard to imagine the Yanks actually losing money in 09, and even with staggering price hikes, the team stands to see its attendance pass 4 million again next year. Add in the success of the YES Network and budget concerns don't seem to be an issue.

That leaves us with the merits of Teixiera on the field.

Unlike Manny, Tex is younger, more athletic, and can field his position with the best of them. He is the type of bat the Yanks could plug into the lineup for the next decade and forget about. He has all the skills that would make him a valuable asset for the duration of his contract.

There has been this mindset that has infected Yankee land that free agent signings, any free agent signings, are quick fix pyramid schemes that don't work. The disasters of everyone from Carl Pavano to Gary Sheffield have seemingly poisoned the water for many who follow the Yanks when it comes to free agents. Yet, the problem is not with free agent signings. The problem is WHO you choose to give your money to.

Teixeira is the type free agent who will give you a return on your investment. He also gives you security to build from within. If you sign Teixiera and put him at first base, you have an infield of him, Cano, Jeter and A-Rod (along with Posada), meaning that you can expect to get A+ quality offense out of each of your infield positions for the next several years. That means you can take a chance on a kid like Brett Gardner in center if you want, believing that you can carry average offense at that position if the kid doesn't pan out. It also means that you can hand an outfield position over to Austin Jackson in a year, if he progresses the way people expect him to, and watch him mature without worrying that his growing pains would destroy the offense.

Some will argue that first base should be left wide open for Posada or even Jeter and their eventual move when age makes a switch of positions necessary. That seems somewhat idiotic, doesn't it?

The Yanks have already toyed with the idea of trading Hideki Matsui, but even if they didn't, Matsui's contract ends after this season and Posada could move into the everyday DH role afterwards. Jeter's defense seemed to actually improve this year and, considering how athletic he is and how he keeps himself in such good shape, it seems hard to believe that Jeter would REQUIRE a position change for another 3 years or more. By that time, Posada would be gone (most likely retired) and Jeter could move into a DH role as well, or move to a corner outfield spot. Saving first base for possible position changes doesn't seem like a winning strategy to me. What seems like a winning strategy would be putting the best players on the field right now and in the future. It would seem hard to argue that Teixiera doesn't make that possible.

Plus, signing Teixiera would allow the Yanks to use prospects to acquire a young center fielder or corner outfielder via a trade.

Teams are built through smart trades, wise free agent investments, and a clear understanding of which home-grown players are worth keeping. Teixiera is the type of free agent the Yanks could invest money in and not worry about that investment going belly up.