Who could the Yankees actually get in a trade?

The Lohud Yankee Blog had a good post this morning where they looked at the top of the rotation type guys on each team and tried to decide if any of them would be available. As you can imagine, on almost all the top-flight guys, the answer was a resounding "NO." But, I think all of us Yankee fans fully expect that the team is going to have to look at second-tier players rather than high-end guys, at least at this stage of the game. So, instead of talking about pitchers the Yankees wouldn't be able to pry away from their current team, let's look at guys that might be available.
This is a very short list of guys that might be available on teams that might deal with the Yankees. Most have flaws, most have high-end rewards. It all depends on what the other team wants, and what the Yanks are willing to give up.

Fausto Carmona (Cleveland Indians) - Carmona has probably been the most prominent name mentioned when it comes to possible trade chips. He's 27, has $5 million coming to him next year, is locked up through 2014 for a very reasonable price, and put up a good year last season with a 3.77 ERA. Any Yankee fan worth his or her salt remembers Carmona from 2007, when he dominated the Yankees, ended Joe Torre's tenure in New York, and looked like a special pitcher that was just coming into his own. If you take 2007 and 2010 and combine them, they tell the story of a top-caliber pitcher who throws a hard sinker, ala Cien Mien Wang, only with a few more strikeouts. The problem is the two years inbetween.
In 2008 and 2009, Carmona was, to put it mildly, ineffective. He was even sent down to the minors at one point to try and figure things out. His good is very good, his bad is very bad.
So, if the Yankees were to inquire about Carmona, there would be a natural tug of war between they and the Indians. On the one hand, the Yankees would be reluctant to give up top-quality prospects for a guy that has as many terrible years as good years to his name as a starter. Can you imagine how much justifiable venom would be directed at Brian Cashman if he traded, say, Austin Romine and another player for Carmona and, in two years, Carmona was pitching to a 5 ERA and Romine was doing his best Buster Posey imitation? Not fun times.
On the flip side, however, the Indians are in need of good players, are in the middle of rebuilding, have a young, affordable pitcher coming off a very good year. Why in the world would they hand the Yanks this guy for, say, a few second-tier prospects, or even high-risk, high-reward guys like Joba Chamberlain?
Carmona only makes sense for the Yankees if the cost is reasonable, because there is too much of a risk that he reverts back to 2009 numbers. But, it might not make sense for the Indians to trade a 27-year old pitcher with good talent off a top year for a "reasonable" price.

Gavin Floyd (Chicago White Sox) - Here is another name you've heard bantered around. I am still unclear as to why the White Sox, who picked up Adam Dunn and seem to believe they can make a run this season, would trade Floyd, but the rumors have been persistent enough to make you believe there is some fire near the smoke.
I like Floyd a lot. He's 27, like Carmona, owed only $2.7 million this year, had a 4.08 ERA last year, and ever since he was made a full-time starter three years ago, that's been about his norm. A lot of people thought Floyd would be a top-end of the rotation guy, so maybe the White Sox willingness to trade him stems as much from disappointment that he hasn't reached that full potential as it does from anything else. But, if the Yankees could secure him, he would give them a viable #3 starter and, at 27, a guy who could be a fixture in the rotation for years. And, at 27, there is still a possibility that he can fulfill his potential. Maybe different scenery could help.
Yet, the question as always is, what, exactly, are you looking to give up? Would the White Sox demand an Austin Romine, or a top-end pitcher? Maybe they would be interested in Chamberlain as either a reliever or a starter, as a part of a package, or course. They need some help up the middle, so maybe the Yankees could entice them with an Eduardo Nunez? For a guy like Floyd, you really couldn't justify top prospects, but some second-tier guys might be able to do it.

Jonathan Sanchez (San Francisco Giants) - No rumors have circulated about Sanchez, but if the Giants are looking to upgrade offensively, Sanchez might give them the best option to secure some hitters without giving up one of their prized pitchers in Matt Cain, Tim Lincecum, or youngster Madison Bumgardner. Why would the Yankees want him? Well, he's 28, makes $2 million, had a 3.07 ERA last year, is a lefty with strikeout stuff, and pitched almost 200 innings last season. He also had, for the most part, a good postseason and helped the Giants win a title.
Why would the Giants trade him? As I said before, Sanchez, because of the Giants depth of pitching, is expendable if they want to bring back a good hitter. The Giants won last year with great pitching and timely hitting. Problem is, that timely hitting isn't always going to be there, especially when the guys playing the field have a less than impressive resume to their name. That offense was deemed to be lacking last year, when they started their magic carpet ride. It's hard to imagine they could conjure that kind of magic again. Trading Sanchez gives them the chance to get better offensively and stay at the top, pitching wise.
Why it wouldn't work? Well, again, who would the Giants want? Jesus Montero aint being traded for Jonathan Sanchez and the Giants already have Buster Posey behind the plate. Would the Yankees consider Nick Swisher in a deal? Doubtful. Would the Giants give him up for not-MLB-ready talent? Doubtful.
There is also the fact that Sanchez had a breakout year this year. Before this, he had been a hard-throwing disappointment who had about a 5 ERA, on average. Is Sanchez just coming into his own, or is he Oliver Perez? When there is a chance he could be Ollie, you probably wouldn't be comfortable trading top talent for him.

Anibal Sanchez (Flordia Marlins) - The Marlins aren't trading Josh Johnson, but Sanchez is an underrated young pitcher (26) who probably won't make an untouchable lists. He had a 3.55 ERA last year and was probably the team's second best pitcher.
I threw his name on here because, if the Yanks were going to make a deal for a Marlins pitcher, he makes sense for them over Johnson (unavailable) or Ricky Nolasco (no good) but, in reality, I would shocked if the Marlins would give him up. He's affordable, good, young - why would you trade him?

Scott Kazmir (Anaheim Angels) - This, to me, could be the most interesting guy. I have no idea of the Angels would be interested in trading him, but Kazmir is extremely talented, has pitched, and pitched well, in the AL East before, and is still only 26. He's owed $8 million and he's coming off a God-awful year where he had a 5.94 ERA and only pitched in 150 innings.
Here are the reasons to be turned off: he's had a lot of injury problems already and he might be just a 5 or 6 inning pitcher; he was bad last year, really bad; I have no idea what his medicals look like, or what affect those injuries have had on his velocity, the key to his success.
Here are the reasons to be intrigued: as everyone knows, when he is on, there is no more talented pitcher in baseball; he's a lefty; he has a GREAT track record against the Red Sox, especially in Fenway; you could get him cheap (if he's available) considering the risks that come along with him.
Everyone has mentioned Zambrano as high-risk, high reward, but Kazmir, to me, is just as intriguing because he doesn't make as much money, is younger, is a lefty, and is a proven winner in the AL East. And how great would it be for Kazmir to resurrect his career in New York with the Yankees, not the Mets?

So, if it didn't matter, what was the point?

t never ceases to amaze me how quickly the tone, and narrative, can change in sports. A week ago, today, New York Yankee brass, especially GM Brian Cashman, were fawning over now-Phillie pitcher Cliff Lee like a love-sick 13-year old girl hanging boy-band pictures on her wall. Did you ever think you would hear a grown man say things like “he's worth the wait,” when talking about a free agent? I mean, come on Cash-man. Have some dignity. He might as well have said “Lee completes me.”

The fanbase was little better. Lee was a forgone conclusion to most, and a quick check of the blogs and message boards would have found most fans lining up exactly how the rotation should look on opening day, and who the fifth starter should be on the off-chance Andy Pettitte did not return.

Seven days ago, Cliff Lee was the answer, the antidote to AJ Burnett's rollecoaster ride of a career, to Phil Hughes' stunted growth, to the possible retirement of Pettitte, and so on.

Now, on Dec. 15? Ahhh, who needed the bum, anyway.

One can hardly blame Cashman for moving on as quickly as Sarah Palin when a question about geography comes up. He's the General Manager, not a fan, and he has to refocus quickly because there suddenly aint a tremendous amount of time to get things done. But, the fans, and mouthpiece media personalities, have been more enjoyable since Tuesday morning.

Here is the new narrative:

*Lee is 32, and a 7-year contract would have been outrageous (it amazes me how many Yankee fans have suddenly taken an interest in Yankee budgetology)

*Lee didn't want to come here anyway, so fine (a legitimate point, probably the only one that's been brought up in the last 36 hours)

*Lee isn't that good, anyway (might as well be followed by “and he's ugly, and smells like cabbage”)

*Lee got blown up in the World Series, proving he isn't automatic in the big spot (and Michael Jordan missed plenty of last-second shots, does that mean you would have wanted Bill Worthington taking the shot?)

*Lee has a bad back (certainly something to be worried about, but it didn't seem to affect him in any way in the postseason when he was spanking the Yankees around)

*The Yankees have a good enough team without Lee (then why in the hell was everyone from Brian Cashman to the concession stand attendants at Yankee Stadium willing to wait until the Beatles reunited for Lee to make a decision?)

Let me expound a little on two points made above: the budgetology fixation by Yankee fans, and the idea that the Yankees are “just fine” without Lee.

First, I have never, and will never understand the interest some fans have in the Yankee payroll. There is no cap in baseball. The Yankees can spend whatever they want, and they usually do. The only time fans should care about contracts is when a.) there is a cap (see NFL, NBA) or, b.) when they root for a small market team. If I'm a fan of the Cleveland Indians and my team is looking to offer a 7-year, $138 million offer to ANYONE, I get interested. Why? Because I know my little team only has so much money with which to play. Spend too much money on one guy, and it might be him and eight minor leaguers running out there every summer day.

But, as a fan of the Yankees, or Red Sox, or, now, the Phillies, why worry? You don't know anything about their finances so you have no idea what their cutoff point would be to begin with. No one can gauge when their payroll becomes a burden because they change that number all the time. The Yankees say they won't go over $200 million, then skate by that when necessary. The Red Sox claim they won't go over the luxury tax number, but then speed by it when Carl Crawford and Adrian Gonzelez come to play. The Phillies, as late as Friday of last week, were saying it would take a small miracle to work Lee into their budget. Hallelujah, heaven be praised cause that miracle came true.

See, those teams have A LOT of money. Are you really “concerned” as a fan about what kind of constraints a Cliff Lee deal was going to put on the Yankee budget in seven freaking years? Really?

“Well, Bob, Lee would help win the Yankees a championship next season, but I am really concerned about 2016.” Seriously? Who the hell cares? You don't think that, by that time, the Yankees will have figured out how to absorb that bad contract? They have every other time.

Budgetology, to me, is like sabermetrics: it focuses on things that don't really have to do with the sport. For some people, I guess, sitting down and trying to figure out what the long-term player personnel costs will be for the Yankees between 2015 and 2020 is fun. To me, it's a collossal waste of time.

The second point is that the Yankees are fine without Lee.

Let's just say that, if the Yankees honestly believed they were “fine” without Lee, they wouldn't have willingly bent over for the last three weeks hoping that he wouldn't jam anything up there (which, of course, he did). I'll say it again, Brian Cashman acted like a lovesick cheerleader with a crush on the quarterback. Do you think he would do that if he felt great about Ivan Nova and Sergio Mitre anchoring the final two spots in the rotation?

But, if you needed a little more indepth analysis as to why the Yanks are not better off without Lee, or even “just fine,” here you go:

*AJ Burnett is still a Yankee — That's your number two starter, folks. The Burnett train is in the station and ready for departure, prepare for the very real, all but certain chance that you'll be going off the rails on some point during your journey.

Look, the Yanks can say all the right things about Burnett having a “bounceback” year and recharging his career, and they can also try as they might to paint his first year with the Yankees as some sort of pitching clinic put on for the benefit of the baseball world. The truth is, Burnett has only had one year in his career (2008) that justifies him being thought of as anything other than a number 3 or 4 starter. Okay, want to say his 2009 season, with a 4.07 ERA and 13-9 record was more of a number 2 starter type of year, maybe, but that's pretty much the pinnacle for Mr. Face Cream Pie maker. Now, suddenly, at 34, our buddy AJ is gonna become a front-line starter? Again, let's review: AJ Burnett, in an 11-year career, has won more than 13 games just once. In his two years with the Yankees, his record is 23-24. Think about that for a second. AJ Burnett, playing for a team with one of the best offensives in baseball, has a below .500 record and found a way to lose 15 games last year. He's your number two starter.

*Phil Hughes is just OK —  Look, I will readily admit that I have been down on Hughes for a long time. I just don't see the "greatness" that was predicted. Several of my buddies are big Hughes fans, and they will rightfully point out in these discussions that Hughes, in his first full year as a starter, won 18 games and had an ERA that was just over 4. I give him credit for that, I really do. However, is that all we can expect from The Franchise?

Forget the fact that the Yankees consistently refused to trade Hughes for better MLB-proven talent over the years (you don't hang onto the guy if you think his ceiling is Jon Garland), without Lee in the picture, and with an aged, perhaps less than excited Andy Pettitte maybe returning, you NEED Hughes to be better. Let's face it, you need him to be your second guy in the rotation, simple as that. Can he do it? 

I won't string up Hughes the way I did Burnett, and tie his resume to his throat, because unlike Burnett who has more than a decade of futility to prove he isn't a front-line starter, Hughes has only one full year as a starter and a few other years of bouncing around between the rotation and the pen. However, I will say this: when your fastball tops out at 93 MPH and is straight as an arrow, when your curveball doesn't fool a stick ball player in the streets of Brooklyn, and when you can't throw a third pitch to save your life, well then, it's kinda hard to predict greatness, especially in year two. Instead, the best bet is that Hughes essentially is the pitcher in 2011 that he was in 2010. With Lee, that's just fine. Without Lee, that's a problem.

*Andy Pettitte is old and maybe not all that into baseball - We don't even know if Andy is gonna come back but, seriously, how much can you expect from the man? He's almost 40, dealt with two fairly significant injuries last year, and is having probably the most difficult time ever deciding whether to come back or not. It's a lot to expect that he is gonna go out there, pitch 200 innings, post 15+ wins, and record a 4 or lower ERA. And, at some point, a $200 million team can't continue to put the fate of the rotation on the shoulders of a 40-year old man, right?

*In-house options kinda suck - I like Ivan Nova a lot, I really do.I think he has some big-time stuff. But, he has had less than a month of experience at the major league level and, in that month, showed that, while the talent is there, the maturity isn't. In almost every game he pitched last year, Nova imploded after the fourth or fifth inning. Considering Burnett imploded after the third inning most days, that aint that bad of a record, but you can't send that kid out there over the course of the season.

Sergio Mitre? I don't think I need to explain why Sergio Mitre is not a viable solution for a championship-caliber rotation, right?

The Yankees have some really good young arms in the minors, including Manny Banuelos, who seems to have become somewhat of a superstar in the Yankee system, much heralded Andrew Brackman, and Dellin Betances are all top-quality arms, but none of them are ready for the big time right now.

*Trade for who? - Okay, Lee is gone, the chance to simply spend money is out the window, and the only thing left to do is trade for someone. So, who's out there?

We've already heard that King Felix Hernandez aint going no where, it's hard to imagine the Giants will be interested in giving away any of their arms, considering they just used them all to secure a championship for the first time in 50+ years, and unless I am very wrong, the Red Sox probably aren't proposing a Jon Lester for Brett Gardner deal in the near future. That means the Yanks either go into next season much like they ended the last one, or they trade for a low-grade option, considering the royalty they were just in the running to land.
Maybe the Indians are willing to part with Fausto Carmona for a collection of mid-level prospects. Maybe the Cubs need to part ways with Carlos Zambrano, and maybe Big Z would like a reunion with his old pitching coach. Maybe Ricky Nolasco is a lot better than his record, or talent, indicates. Maybe Freddy Garcia is more than a medical marvel whose arm might literally be made of jelly at this point.
You get the drift. There isn't one sure thing in the group. At this point, the Yankees, and their fans, would be THRILLED with high risk, high reward pitchers like Carmona and Zambrano, guys who would have had the fan base screaming on talk radio if they had been mentioned before Lee turned tail and ran for the City of Brotherly Love.
So, you see, signing Lee was kinda important. It was important because the Yankees spent their whole offseason waiting on his decision, an offseason that saw needed bullpen help pass them by as they sat by the phone like a jilted college coed. It was important because the Yankees now enter next year with a whole lot of question marks in the worst place in which to have them: the rotation and pen. It was also important because, now, even if that front-line starter does become available, it will probably require them to trade Jesus Montero, their prized prospect and the best hitting prospect in all the minors, to complete the deal.
This isn't just about next year, this is about the next five years, as the Yankees won't have the luxury to just throwing money at a pitcher to bring them in,
But, like so many Yankee fans have said the last few days, who needs him....

Thank you, Joe. You're welcome back here anytime.

I know Joe Torre wrote a book that really bothered a lot of people within the Yankee organization. I know Brian Cashman wasn't pleased that he was protrayed as a guy who became beholden to the designer stats of the day and, in the end, refused to stand up for Torre the way he had in the past. I know the Steinbrenner family was upset that Torre essentially outed how sick The Boss, George Steinbrenner, was by the time the 2007 season ended. We all know that Alex Rodriguez isn't a fan of Torre after his book painted the slugger as a self-absorbed prima donna who obsessed over Derek Jeter and couldn't come through in the clutch.
All of that is valid.
And, I know Joe Torre continues to hold a grudge against the Yankees for essentially forcing him out, but not having the guts to outright let him go for fear of the inevitable public relations backlash.
Again, valid.
However, if Joe Torre is truly done as a manager, and will now retreat to a job on television or, perhaps, with Major League Baseball, it is my hope that all old hard feelings subside and Torre can once again find a home with the Yankees.
Joe Torre is one of the great New York Yankees in history, as far as managers go. He led that team to four world championships. He was a part of a golden era for the Yankees, a dynasty, not just a string of good teams.
Some of his best managerial jobs came when the Yankees didn't even get out of the first round of the playoffs. If you have a chance on a slow Saturday afternoon (or a slow day at work) go check out the roster of the 2005 and 2006 teams, especially the starting rotations. Joe Girardi would have had a hard time winning 88 games with Aaron Small leading the way for half a season.
It's gotten somewhat foolish on the YES Network these days. Torre has been all but expunged from the Yankee history. There are no Yankeeography specials broadcast anymore. No more highlights of Torre crying after the 1996 championship. It's as if the Bombers managed themselves between 1996 and 2007.
But, what happens in the next six years when the Yankees want to celebrate the 20th anniversary of the '96 championship (my God, has it been that long) and everyone from Paul O'Neill to Tino Martinez, to Bernie Williams, to perhaps a recently retired Derek Jeter, show up at the stadium. Is Joe Torre going to be forgotten, even then?
Yogi Berra swore he would never set foot back in Yankee Stadium after George Steinbrenner calously fired one of the great Yankees of all time after only 17 games in 1982, and didn't even have the decency to speak to him personally. In 1999, he returned. Joe Torre is a Yankee icon. I hope for all our sake, and for his, this petty squabbling can be set aside and he can be welcomes back with open arms. The Yankees handled his departure about as poorly as possible. Torre perhaps could have been more diplomatic in his book about the Yankee years. Both share some of the blame for the split. Neither side did something so egregious that it should detract from what was acheived during those years. Joe Torre cannot be wiped off Yankee history. He had too much to do with writing that history, no matter what a schmuck like Michael Kay wants to believe.

A quick note about Donnie Baseball taking over as the Dodgers manager next year. I hope for his sake that the Dodgers get good again, and fast. I love Donnie and believe he will make a great manager. He knows the game, knows the players, and is one of the most respected guys in the sport. The idea that some Triple A guy in the Dodgers organization should have gotten the call over Mattingly is, to me, absurd. Donnie has been a long-time coach in this league, and was, at one time, one of the best players in the league, a guy who would have punched his ticket to Cooperstown easily had it not been for his back injuries. You honestly believe that some no-name Triple A guy is going to command more respect in the clubhouse than Don Mattingly? (yes, I'm looking at you when I say that, Edurado Perez)
What concerns me is the Dodgers. Frank McCourt is going through his blitzkrieg of a divorce and much of the speculation is that, for a team with talent, there will be little done in the offseason to compliment that talent and help the Dodgers regain NL West-leading form. If Donnie is given the right roster, I believe the Dodgers can once again be a contender. However, if the McCourt family's woes prevent any kind of action, I have no idea how, exactly, Donnie can turn that team around.
It will be tough, though, if Donnie starts to win, to see him celebrating in Dodger blue. Can we trade managers? Is that possible? Girardi for Mattingly, straight up?

Put the Phil Hughes Cy Young Winner celebratory cake on ice for a while.

I have not been a fan of Phil Hughes.
Part of my issue with him really has little to actually do with Hughes. He couldn't control how the Yankees promoted and hyped him, how they called him the "next Roger Clemens" (one assumes without the steroids), and how they refused to trade him for anyone. Listening to the breathless description of him as a pitcher, I was expecting to see a combination of Sandy Koufax and Jesus.
But, even though Hughes was lower on my favorite player totem pole, and even though I had serious arguements with my friends about The Franchise as a pitcher, I couldn't deny how Hughes started the season. April looked like the culmination of everything I had heard about Hughes. His fastball was exploding, his curve was 12-6, and he had great control. Unlike the other overhyped Yankee phenom, Joba Chamberlain, who was given his chance to start last year and failed, Hughes was efficient and effective every time out. My friends who insisted Hughes would find his feet crowed and I, as the Hughes detractor, admitted that I might have made a mistake. Maybe Hughes really was the next superstar pitcher in waiting.
Then May hit and things went back to normal.
In his first six starts of the season, Hughes was utterly brilliant, going 4-0 and producing a wonderful 1.38 ERA. Then, on May 17, he got bombed by the Red Sox and things have gone down hill from there. His June ERA was 5.17, his July ERA even worse at 5.52. In August, Hughes bounced back from being miserable to just being okay with a 4.22 ERA. As I write this, Hughes is making his first start in September and, so far, it is a normal Hughes start of three innings, two runs.
He has won 16 games because of the amazing run support he has received from the Yankee offense, almost 7 runs a game (the highest in the majors) and because the bullpen has, with the acquisition of Kerry Wood and the emergence of Boone Logan (who was finally given a chance to perform by the ever-inept Joe Girardi), become one of the best in the league.
Hughes supporters can talk about his wins all they want. They can also continue to insist that 24 is somehow too young to judge what a pitcher is or will be. The truth is, there is nothing on Phil Hughes' resume that would suggest he will ever be anything other than, at best, a third starter in this league.
His stuff is pedestrian. His fastball is 92 and straight, with a delivery that doesn't involve any deception at all. His curve is nice but certainly not devastating. His changeup, the pitch that supposedly earned him a spot in the rotation, doesn't exist, and his cutter is usually just a flat fastball.
I am not suggesting the Yankees trade Hughes (although I don't believe he or Joba should be untouchable) but it seems clear now that the most coveted Yankee pitching prospect in years is no more than Jon Garland in waiting. Considering they had a chance to trade for Johan Santana if they gave up on Hughes, Melky Cabrera, and Ian Kennedy, it would appear the Yanks sorely misread yet another prospect.

Looking ahead, for the heck of it

Trust me, I get it.

The Yankees are tied for first place in the AL East and for the best record in baseball.
If you had to rank the likely World Series winner at this point in the season, you'd be hard pressed to slide anyone ahead of the Bombers.
Long story short, there is a whole heck of a lot to be interested in this season, like:
Will Andy Pettitte come back healthy?
How are the Yankees going to handle Phil Hughes and his innings limit in the midst of a pennant race?
Will AJ Burnett and Javier Vazquez find some consistency or continue to struggle?
Will Derek Jeter end the season on an up note, salvaging some of what has been his worst season as a professional?
Will Joba Chamberlain, Dave Robertson, and Kerry Wood make for a sturdy bridge to Mariano Rivera?
Will Joe Girardi's tendency to over manage cost the Yankees in September of the playoffs?
There are 40 plus games on the schedule that will help answer all of those questions.
Now, however, is right smack dab in the middle of August. These are the dog days. Pitchers have dead arm. Hitters seem to be slumping. Guys are getting rest, even when they might not need it. Everyone seems a little dinged up. What better time than to take the MAJOR leap forward and start to look at next year's roster. Who will be back, who will be gone, and who will be coming in. We'll take it position by position, looking at the starters, what chance they would be back, and who might replace them if their Yankee days are numbered.

First Base – Mark Teixeira
Chance of returning: 100%
This is as certain as it gets with the Yankees. He has a huge contract, so even if you wanted to move him, you can't. But, trust me, you don't want to move him. Teixeira is having a down year by his standards and is still on pace for very good run-production numbers. He shed the first three months of the season, where he fluctuated between mediocre and God-aweful, and has been one of the Yankees best hitters through the summer. Add on the fact that he is a gold glover at first and Tex will be a Yankee for a long, long time.
Possible replacement: No one.

Second Base – Robinson Cano
Chance of returning: 100%
Again, like Teixeira, this is a no-brainer. Cano has cooled off a little since his torrid start, and talk of him winning an MVP or batting title has subsided, but he is still unquestionably the best second baseman in the American League and probably only Chase Utley (when healthy) is comparable through the entire majors. And, he still has room to improve. You don't normally get the type of middle-of-the-lineup production Cano
produces from your second baseman, and the Yankees won't let go of their superstar middle infielder for anything.
Possible replacement: No one.

Short Stop – Derek Jeter
Chance of returning: 100%
Yes, he is having the worst statistical year of his career. There is no reason to even run down the numbers. Everything, across the board, is down, except maybe his defense.
Yes, he turned 36 this year and many players see their careers come to a quick and abrupt end around this time of life. Baseball might be a tough too fast for the Hall of Famer at this stage of the game.
Yet, we all know Jeter will be back in a Yankee uniform next season, and there are three very good reasons why: First, Jeter is iconic. You can make the argument that he is the most popular Yankee since Mickey Mantle, maybe even Joe Dimaggio. He remains one of the most marketable athletes in the world and that, in and of itself, makes any large contract for Jeter more than economically for the Yankees. There isn't a person in the front office, from Cashman on down, that wants to be remembered for letting Derek Jeter finish his career in another uniform.
Second, while the Yankees are paying A-Rod millions for each home run milestone, the true chase will be next year when Jeter rapidly approaches 3,000 hits. Right now, he is 14 away from 2,900 for his career. Considering there are 40 games to go, you can at least assume Jeter to average around a hit a game. That would put him at 2,926, or 84 hits away from the magic number. While home runs have been stained by the steroid era, 3,000 hits remains a magic number and a guaranteed place holder in the Hall. Add in the fact that no Yankee has ever gotten 3,000 hits and it will make his run that much more interesting and special.
Third, and finally, Jeter deserves a mulligan. Even Ty Cobb had a really bad year during his career. Granted, Jeter's age, and the wear and tear on his body after so many games over so many years, makes it more likely this is a downward trend rather than a bump in the road, he deserves the chance to prove he can rise to his level one or two more times before he calls it quits. He has been a great Yankee for 15 years. He has earned that right.
Possible replacement: No one.

Third Base – Alex Rodriguez
Chance of returning: 100%
Like Jeter, there are warning signs associated with A-Rod. He is 35. He is a step slower. His power numbers are way off, even with his three-homer explosion the other night. After years of being a iron man on the field, he is becoming more and more banged up. Yet, A-Rod is still a feared power hitter who drives in runs and keeps the wheels of the Yankee offensive machine churning. He still gives the Yankees both power and speed out of their fourth-place hitter, and he can devastate a game like no one else.
Also, like Jeter, A-Rod has been too good for too long not to throw this year out as an “oh well, it happens” kinda season and expect a bounce-back next year.
And, who are we kidding, even if the Yankees were desparate to get rid of Rodriguez, his contract (what's that for, 100 years?) makes it an impossibility.
Possible replacement: No one.

Catcher – Jorge Posada
Chance of returning: 30%
Before you start stomping up and down, screaming about how stupid it is to assume that Jorge will not be coming back, understand that the 30% represented what I believe to be Posada's chances of playing as the Yankee everyday catcher next year. I know Jorge is coming back, but I believe that, at this point, he will be coming back as the DH.
Look, it's no secret that most of the pitchers prefer to see someone else behind the plate. His defensive skills, never Johnny Bench-esque to begin with, have become woefully inadequate, and not just in terms of throwing baserunners out. He has a hard time blocking balls in the dirt, has had an inordinate number of passed balls and wild pitches scoot by this season, and the position just bangs the heck out of him. He still has a really good bat, one that remains important to the Yankee offense, but playing behind the plate doesn't do he, or the team, any good going forward.
Possible replacement: Jesus Montero
I just can't see the Yankees trading Montero this offseason, or keeping him down in the minors for another season. Yes, he started off very slowly, but he has been absolutely on fire the last month and a half of the season, devastating AAA pitching. This kid seems to be the real deal, a legit offensive superstar. As far as his catching skills, I can't comment on that, nor can most people because they haven't watched him day-to-day. He supposedly has a cannon for an arm and can call a good game. A lot of the criticisms have been about his size, but Joe Mauer is a big guy, as is Matt Wiener, and both of them seem to be turning out just fine. Montero could be just what the doctor ordered for the team offensively while continueing to progress under the tutelage of a veteran catcher at the major league level.

DH – Lance Berkman
Chance of returning: 10%
I don't see the Big Puma coming back to the Yankees after this season. He hasn't done very well since coming over but I have to believe someone out there will believe in Berkman and his home run potential enough to offer more than a Nick Johnson-esque one year, $5 option. Plus, I think the Yankees will be looking to slide someone else in there come next year.
Possible replacement: Jorge Posada

Right Field – Nick Swisher
Chance of returning: 90%
Swisher is just shy of 30, is cheap, has a few more years left on his contract, plays a good right field, and is having his best offensive year overall. So, why would the Yankees ever think about getting rid of him?
The truth is, I can't imagine Swishalicious going anywhere. He has become a fan favorite and, quite frankly, when you look at his numbers compared with other players at that position, he is more than holding his own.
But, Swisher is also not Teixeira or Cano (superstar caliber), nor is he Jeter or A-Rod (iconic legends). So, because of that, Swisher is only a 90% return kinda guy because, while he is likely to stay put, he isn't untouchable and the Yankees have proven over the years that, if you aren't untouchable, you are very much replaceable.
Possible replacement: No one jumps to mind, but, if the Yankees were to make a move it would have to be for a guy that trumps Swisher in all categories. Since no one really appears on the horizon in terms of free agency that fits such a description, you would have to think it would only be for an upgrade.

Center Field - Curtis Granderson
Chance of returning: 80%
I thought the Granderson trade was the steal of the offseason, but the Grandy Man has had a.......well......it's been a bad year. His average against lefties could only go up from the .174 he was hitting last year, but his just above .200 mark isn't exactly impressing the stat heads. Also, a lot of people thought, after Granderson smacked 30 homers playing half his games in the cavernous Comerica Park in Detroit, that 40 was a distinct possibility once he saw that short right porch in the Bronx. That, like so much else, hasn't materalized.
Yet, Granderson is a terrific center fielder, has provided some of the only speed on the team, and, since reworking his mechanics with Kevin Long, has been on a tear.
Granderson's year puts him on the "maybe" list of guys who could be moved in the right deal. He hasn't lived up to the potential, but who else are the Yankees going to get? Plus, with his new swing and new confidence, Granderson is poised to finish the year strong and one would have to feel confident he would bounce back next year with a much more Granderson-esque season.
Possible replacement: Brett Gardner
I could see this happening if the Yankees dealt Granderson away and brought in another left fielder. That would put Gardner back at his natural position in center. However, I don't buy this as happening. I think Granderson gets another shot at this. He has too much talent, too much potential, and I don't think you mix and match yet again, even off of a disappointing year.

Left Field – Brett Gardner

Chance of returning: 50%
Gardner is perhaps the hardest regular Yankee on which to get a read. Let's assume for a second that Granderson is back, and that Gardner does not simply make a move in positions. It comes down to whether the Yankees want to go into next season, and perhaps beyond, with His Grittiness in the outfield.
Reasons why Gardner will be back: he has had a very nice year with the bat, has gotten a lot of big hits for the team, has played very good defense in the outfield, and, with the aging legs of both Jeter and A-Rod, Gardner and Granderson real provide the only speed on the team, with Gardner being the only exceptionally fast player on the squad.
Reasons why Gardner will be gone: his good year has also ensured that he would be a valuable trade chip if the Yankees needed another player (especially a pitcher) and couldn't do it via free agency, his numbers have dropped off somewhat at the end of the year which could mean a late-season swoon might be in the making (not the type of last impression you want to make on your team), and he is playing the position of a guy a lot of people, including the Yankees, might covet in the off season (we'll talk about him in a minute).
If this were my team, Gardner would be back, but he fits the bill of the type of player always seemingly available in the Yankee system: good enough to warrant interest from other teams, not good enough to be a star so always on the chopping block.
Gun to my head, I say he is back.
Possible replacement: Carl Crawford
Crawford, finishing up his final year with the Tampa Bay Rays, will be a free agent. He has said as much and the team has all but admitted they don't plan to retain him (don't get me started on what a waste of a team it has become to allow a franchise to remain in Tampa). He is a better player than Gardner, pure and simple. He can steal the same amount of bases, hit for more power, hit for a higher average, and play just as good a left field. He also is still in his prime (29 years old) and buying in on guys who are proven but just entering their peak years (Teixeira, Swisher, CC Sabathia) has proven to work out well for the Yanks the last few years.
So, why would the Yanks pass?
A couple of reasons; first, the Yankees don't need a huge infusion of power into the lineup. They get A+ power numbers from first, second, third, and have the potential to get more out of center and short, if both guys have bounce-back years. Swisher in right provides plenty, himself, and Posada at DH is still capable of 20 or more homers, as might be youngster Montero, if given a chance. If you take the power away, Gardner and Crawford are much closer players. Second, while Crawford is one of the best players around right now, he plays a very aggressive, physical style, and has been doing so at the major league level for a while. His speed, which makes an exceptional player, might not last for much longer. Third, and perhaps most importantly, I don't believe the Yankees are going to splurge on two high-priced free agents and I honestly believe their focus will be on pitching. They are going to have a bigger need for it come next season. While Crawford, any way you shake it, would be an upgrade over Gardner, it would count more as a want rather than a need.
Because of that, I believe the Yankees pass on Crawford (who might end up in Boston) and go after another lefty ace in free agency, whose name may rhymn with knee.

Starting pitchers – CC Sabathia
Chance of returning: 100%
He is the ace of the staff and one of the best in the business. Rather than being scared off by the short Yankee Stadium porch in right field, he has made his home ballpark a true advantage, becoming almost unbeatable in the Bronx. He is a workhorse, has what seems to be a rubber arm, and gets better the bigger the moment. And, as Johan Santana struggles a bit with the Mets over in Queens, it looks like Brian Cashman may have made the right choice in passing on a trade for that lefty pitcher and, instead, targeting the big man.
Possible replacement: No one

Phil Hughes
Chance of returning: 100%
Of the three young starters the Yankees touted a few years ago (Hughes, Joba Chamberlain, Ian Kennedy) Hughes has turned out to be the most productive. While it still remains to be seen if Hughes will be the ace-quality starter he was in the early part of 2010, or the middle-of-the-rotation guy he has appeared to be for much of the rest of the season, his age, his price tag, his overall health, and his maturation in the system already, makes him a lock to be back next year.
Possible replacement: No one.

AJ Burnett
Chance of returning: 95%
This is probably 100%, but the Yankees might get so frustrated with Burnett and his on-again, off-again outing that they might be willing to eat most of his contract to get him off the roster. Yet, even though the Yankees are the only team in baseball capable of doing something like that, it is highly, highly unlikely. Burnett, after this season, has three more years left on what now seems like a odious $85 million contract. Who would be dumb enough to take that on, even if the Yankees were picking up most of the bill? The answer is no one.
Plus, on the positive side, Burnett remains one of the most talented throwers in the game and is perfectly capable of pitching a gem, or getting on a roll towards the end of the year and being one of the team's best performers. Because of that, it is highly unlikely the Yankees would be willing to part company.
Possible replacement: Ivan Nova
I personally believe the Yankees will look to add two new pitchers this offseason already (which I'll explain in a moment) so, if they traded Burnett, I think they would keep it cheap and promote from within. Nova is having an excellent year at AAA and would be in line to get a chance at the number 5 spot in the rotation.

Andy Pettitte
Chance of returning: 30%
If you had asked me this question eight weeks ago, I would have told you this percentage would be at about 80%. However, Pettitte, who has flirted with retirement for what seems like a decade straight now, always said he would pitch as long as he was healthy. Well, he was healthy all last year and through the All Star break this year. Now, however, he seems to be dealing with a groin injury that won't go away and the veteran lefty has shown real frustration when speaking about his rehab. Even if Pettitte comes back and pitches well at the end of the season, his current injury is probably enough to keep him from trying it again next year. At his age, the body might be telling him to shut it down.
Possible replacement: Ted Lilly, Joba Chamberlain
The Yankees were rumored to be interested in their former left handed pitcher at the trade deadline but backed away. As a free agent, and a little older, Lilly could be a nice stop-gap for either a youngster in the minors or another free agent pitcher down the road. He's a left hander, has pitched in New York and the ÅL East in the past, and would probably be amenable to coming back to where it all started for him. As far as Chamberlain, it is a possibility only in a pinch, in my opinion, but it is an option. The Yankees spent a lot of time “building” his arm up last year and he has remained injury free this season, albeit in the pen. I think they would look to keep him in his current role, but, if they needed to, he could be swung back into the rotation.

Javier Vazquez
Chance of returning: 3%
I don't have a lot of faith that Javy is coming back to the Yanks. His return has been okay but not triumphant. He is still shaky in the big game and he isn't exactly a fan favorite. Plus, Javy is going to be 35 and his stuff, including his velocity, has seemed to be down this year from even last year. Considering his track record would probably be enough to command a larger contract, both in terms of money and years, than the Yankees are willing to give up, it's hard to imagine the Vazquez experiment lasting more than a season.
Possible replacement: Cliff Lee
Is there a worse secret in baseball than that Cliff Lee wants to be a Yankee and the Yankees want Cliff Lee?The Bombers had a deal in place this trade deadline to bring Lee to the Bronx in exchange for Jesus Montero, so you know they are serious. Sabathia, who is one of Lee's best friends, has also not been very couy when asked whether Lee will want to sign with the Yankees come this winter. I think the Yankes, with Pettitte and Vazquez coming off the books, will have one big contract splash in them, and Lee, still only 31 and one of the best in the game, will be wearing pinstripes next season.

Closer – Mariano Rivera
Chance of returning: 100%
Unless Rivera wants to walk away after this year, he is coming back.
Forget the contract. Like Jeter, there is no way anyone is letting Rivera walk in the twilight of his career to another team. He will be back and, unless shown otherwise, will be just as good as always.
Possible replacement: No one.

Couple of notes here: I didn't tackle the bench players at all because they are fairly expendable. I doubt Austin Kearns comes back, wouldn't be surprised if Marcus Thames has a second go-around, and think that Pena would probably be back as your jack of all trades in the infield. Francisco Cervelli is an interesting case as his situation will be determined by how committed the Yankees are to Posada as their everyday DH, and how much rope they give a kid like Montero. As far as the pen, the only really interesting guys are Joba and Kerry Wood. I can't see the Yanks giving up on Robertson, although, if he were requested in a deal the Yankees desperately wanted, I doubt it would be a breaker, and I think Boone Logan might have secured a chance to be that lefty reliever the Yankees like to have. With Wood and Joba, I think Wood is gone, only because someone will offer him a closer roll, and I think Joba stays, although he will be offered in the right deal. In the end, Joba's talent is still enough to keep the Yanks coming back for more.

Some random Yankee thoughts

For some reason, I have been wrapped up in the Knicks/NBA off season, but now that it is the second half of the baseball season, focus shifts back to the Yanks. It has been a weird week for the Yankees and a lot of things come to mind.

*I feel bad about George Steinbrenner and Bob Shepard but neither one was by any means a shock to the system. Shepard was 99-years-old and in bad health. Steinbrenner had reportedly had a series of strokes over the last few years, was all but hidden away from public view and, by all accounts, was somewhat out of it when people saw him (Bill Madden, while promoting his George book recently, all but stated that, when Jeter and Girardi went to deliver the world series ring to Big Stein before opening day at the Stadium this year, he didn't even really know who they were).
I have no problem paying tribute to both men, especially Steinbrenner. He was one of the most dominate sports figures of the last 40 years and someone who has changed baseball, and sports in general, from his treatment of free agency as a tool to redefine ones team to his establishment of the YES Network.
However, it seems that there was little middle ground when it came to Steinbrenner. I read only a handful of columnists who got the balance of business and owner visionary and impulsive and sometimes cruel owner who, at times, did as much to undermine his own team as he ultimately did to establish it as the greatest sports franchise in the world.
And, the coverage on YES was just over the top. I wouldn't expect YES people to discuss Steinbrenner's bad side. He owned the network, his sons now own it, and a sense of diplomacy and even reverance was appropriate. Considering how open the YES Network has been in allowing different points of view about the team and ownership, especially with the likes of Mike Francesa on the air, you would afford them a little bias when it comes covering the death of their founder.
But, it is one thing to focus on the good aspects, quite another to distort the record. In praising The Boss, Yes Network personnel went too far. Michael Kay glossed over the fact that Steinbrenner had tried to trade Any Pettitte on numerous occassions and was willing to let Bernie Williams walk to the Boston Red Sox before being convinced to sign his star outfielder when discussing the relationship the two players had with the owner. The memorial also replayed a Yankeeography of Steinbrenner, where it mentioned that he had "stood behind his new manager (Joe Torre)" when tabloid papers questioned the move. Such a statement is ironic considering it is now well known that Steinbrenner  traveled to former manager Buck Showalter's house after having let him go and hired Torre to see if Showalter would return. Considering that, if Showalter had said he would have had to fire Torre before the man ever took the field, it is hard to comprehend how anyone could, with a straight face, pretend that Steinbrenner had "stood by his new manager."
Like I said, no one is asking the YES Network to spend 45 minutes on Howie Spira, but disfiguring the facts to hide the truth behind the man is a blantant abdication of journalistic responsibilty.

*A friend of mine made a very good point last night after watching Nick Swisher line a single into right field to win the game in the ninth: it wasn't that long ago, probably less than 12 months actually, where, had there been an emotionally charged game, the importance obvious to all, on the line in the ninth, Derek Jeter would have lined a double into right-center to end the game. Last night, after Tampa reliver Dan Wheeler delivered two meatballs that Jeter fouled away, he struck out on a pitch in the dirt.
Jeter is having argueably the worst season of his professional career. He is batting .270, nearly 50 points lower than his career average. His home runs and RBI are about on target, but his OBP is a paltry .336, again about 50 points lower than average, and his SLG is holding at only .386, 70 points off his normal numbers.
Even more disturbing are his splits. Jeter started the year in usual fashion, with a .330 average in April. A late surge helped salvage Jeter's May, where he hit .280, but June saw his swoon continue hitting on .243. Things have gotten much worse in July, where he is batting only .178 and only has two multi-hit games the entire month.
To give you a sense of how bad this season has been so far, in 2004 when Jeter got off to his historically slow start and was hitting only .220 by the end of May, he was up to .281 by July 17 after a torrid June where he had hit .396, and all of his numbers were significantly higher. Jeter's July and August were average after that, but his September was fantastic and he finished with a .292 average and above average power numbers.
So far this year, a long streak of great hitting has been nonexistent and there is no burst of power, as there had been in 2004, to mitigate the slow start.
I don't know what to make of it at this point. On the positive side, 2004 showed that Jeter could suffer through inconsistency and still play to the back of his baseball card at the end of the year. Also, after a very mediocre 2008 campaign, when some began to question his status as an elite player, Jeter rattled off a 2009 season that was one of his career best. With half of July, and then two months of baseball to go after that, Jeter's numbers could be fairly even when all is said and done.
Yet, he is 36, has played in more games and put his body through more beatings than most because he has been in the playoffs all but one of his professional careers, and eventually ever player begins to show his age.
Jeter has earned the right to play until he wants to sit down, and has also earned the benefit of the doubt that he will turn it around. But, you would have to be blind not to be concerned about this slump and what it could mean for the Yankees. Jeter has always been extremely important to the Yankee offense. They are not the same without him producing. If he is now going to be a .270 hitter, that doesn't bode well for consistency against the better teams.
Here's to hoping the Captain still has it in him and that this is a hiccup.

*I, for one, am glad the Cliff Lee deal failed for two reasons: first, while I care little for the opinions of the Yankee-haters in this country, getting Lee would have been overkill the likes even a fan like me would have been hard pressed to defend. You can make an arguement the Yankees need a bullpen arm to bridge the gap to Mo. You could even make somewhat of an arguement for another bat to take on the DH role because it is hard to feel confident that Nick Johnson will be anything other than a spectator this season. But a rotation ace? The Yankees don't need him. Getting him simply would have incensed the entire league for nothing. I am all for the Yankees being the best they can, but it is better for baseball that some of the other great players play in a different market.
The second reason is Jesus Montero. This kid could be special. Taking a look at him in spring training told everything you needed to know. He could be Manny Ramirez. He could be Miguel Cabrera. He could be a homegrown slugger the likes of which the Yankees haven't produced on their own in years.
Sure, there are questions about his defense, but those question marks seem to always be raised by people with limited knowledge of his abilities. What the heck does Joel Sherman know about this kid behind the plate? How many Scranton games and, before that, Trenton games do you think Slimy Shermy took in the last two years? My guess would be under one.
Montero is 20-years-old. He is the full-time AAA catcher. He started off slowly and everyone seemed ready to say "goodbye" because he wasn't producing prodigeous numbers.
Yet, he is still batting .262 with 8 homers and 39 RBI and, in his last 10 games, he is batting .350 with very good power numbers. That's at AAA. That's at 20.
I don't think you give up on a kid like that, even for Lee. This team isn't getting any younger out in the field. Posada probably has, what, another year left? Jeter may already be slowing down. A-Rod should remain at the top of his game for at least a few more years, but he will begin to see a decline sooner rather than later as well.
The Yankees will get top quality out of Teixeira and Cano for years to come and I believe that Granderson will show himself to be a part of that younger core before the end of the year. But, they are going to need to bring along another big bat and Montero can be that guy to join with Cano and Tex to keep the potent lineup going for years.

*If Montero does become that kind of top offensive player, it will allow the Yankees to do what I believe they should: avoid going after Carl Crawford and hang on to Brett Gardner.
Crawford is the better player and he has the resume to indicate he is a consistent player rather than a flash in the pan. But, look at Gardner's numbers this year compared to Crawford:

Crawford - .322  11  50  ..380  .519  31BB  31SB  70 runs
Gardner - .307  5  29  .398  .412  39BB  25SB  57 runs

Crawford has the clear advantage when it comes to power, with more homers and a better SLG. Forget the RBI because Crawford hits at the top/middle of the lineup while Gardner is at the bottom. But, look at everything else. The batting average is about the same, Gardner has a better eye and better OBP, both guys are on pace to score over 100 runs, and both guys are about the same when it comes to stolen bases. Plus, this is Gardner's first full year in the majors and he is almost 3 years younger than Crawford.
As I stated above, Crawford is the better player, but the gap between the two is by no means as pronouced as their salary will be next year. Crawford will geta BIG contract. Gardner is making $452,000 this year.
For what the Yankees need, is Crawford enough of a lift to justify the money? Another team might need him as a table setter or as a three-hole hitter, but the Yankees don't need that. They need what Gardner brings.
I would prefer that, next year, Gardner be your left fielder and the Yanks focus on Lee, who might be more needed next season as Javier Vazquez will probably be allowed to leave via free agency and Andy Pettitte might retire.
Keep gritty, gutty Brett Gardner as a starter. He's younger, cheaper, and he might even have room to improve and close that gap between he and Crawford even more.

Looking for leaders, not followers

On Saturday, Carmelo Anthony, the 26-year-old Brooklyn native and current Denver Nugget small forward, got married in NYC. Some usual suspects, including one Lebron James, showed up to take part in the festivities.
The New York Post had a few shots of the wedding, and the litany of stars that showed up.
A couple of thoughts came to mind.
First, Lebron evidently ignored all questions from reporters and all shouts, good or bad, from fans as he entered. The pictures shown of him tell the story. He looks a lot more like a guy that just got charged with a felony, rather than one "ready to make history" in South Beach.
It was somewhat amazing considering not just two days before Lebron had orchestrated his own media circus, all with the express intent of promoting himself. I guess, when you don't get to hand pick the people who will ask you questions and dictate terms, it isn't as interesting to deal with the media.
But, besides Lebron, the spectacle got me thinking.
Are there any leaders in the league anymore, or just followers?
We know Kobe Bryants not a follower, or any of the real Big Three in Boston. And, we know that Dwayne Wade was only taking people to his team, not following anyone to theirs.
But, who else?
Is Kevin Durant a guy who wants the attention, the bright lights and the big stage, and the responsibility of leading his team, and talented teammates, to a championship? How about Chris Paul? He was one of the guys who came in the car with Lebron to Melo's wedding. Does Paul look at the marriage of Wade, Lebron, and Bosh and think "all right, I am going to beat their asses when we play" or is he thinking "I wonder if there's a way they could clear some more cap space for me?"
Do you think Derrick Rose was itching to have Lebron or Wade come to Chicago to lead them to victory or do you think he was quietly sitting back stewing at the notion that anyone would have to come in and help "hold his hand" while leading him to the promise land?
And while neither guy has enough time in the league to warrant such questions, it will be interesting to see if Tyreke Evans and John Wall are basketball killers or simply pretenders.
That leaves Carmelo Anthony.
I have a feeling that Melo is the most lilkely player to be dealt this offseason, and the Knicks the most likely suitor.
It makes sense. The Nuggets are on the downward spiral. Two of their most important players - Chauncey Billups and Kenyon Martin - are on the wrong side of 30 and both have shown downward decline. They can both be productive players for a few more years, I'm sure, but not as the focus of the offense. The mix on the team has seemingly gone bad, with JR Smith and Carmelo exchanging jabs last year in the playoffs against Utah. Above all else, it is uncertain as to the future of George Karl, who is battling cancer, and it has to be a concern of Carmelo's that Karl will not return, or will for only a short time.
Plus, with Anthony coming up on free agency next year, and the Nuggets having just "witnessed" the spectacle of that process this year, it is doubtful they would want to go through something similar.
While they have insisted that they have no intention of trading their best player, if Melo continues to balk at their contract extension offer, wouldn't it be only smart for them to make a trade now and get something good back?
So let's say the basketball gods smile on New York after losing Lebron, and the Nuggets give Donnie Walsh a call to play a round of "let's make a deal." It would, no question, makes the Knicks one of the best teams in the East, but my question would be, is Carmelo a Kobe or is he a Lebron?
Like with Chris Paul, another extremely talented player who may be on the Knicks radar screen, the question remains, how does Carmelo look at what just happened in Miami? What was his response when he saw his buddy, Lebron, at his wedding? Did he ask about cap space on the Heat roster? Did he question what kinds of villas are available on the beach in Miami? Or, did he walk up to Lebron, pat him on the shoulder, congratulate him, and then say something to the effect of "but, if you guys see me in the playoffs, you're gonna be waiting for that ring a long time."
After the Lebron saga, that remains my biggest question about current athletes. If there was ever a player who should have been wired with the same Jordan, Bird, Magic, Russell, West kind of hardware, it should have been Lebron. He should have wanted to beat Wade's brains out, not run and follow him like a scared puppy. He should have watched Kobe in the finals, watched as the world debated whether he was the greatest Laker or not, and thought "I am gonna be in that kind of conversation one day." Instead, he chose some sort of frat party, South Beach free-for-all with his buddies, in his buddies town, on his buddies team, than carving out some sort of legacy.
Is Melo different? Is he a killer? Is he the guy who wants to build something special on his own or does he want to follow the crowd, look to share the responsibilty, deflect the blame, and ride a winning player's coattails to a ring?
It's hard to tell whether Anthony is a "big game" player or not. He has been in the playoffs every single year he has been in the league, getting knocked out in the first round in each of his first five years in the league. Last year, the Nuggets went all the way to the conference finals, getting knocked out by the Lakers. This year, it was another first-round knockout at the hands of the Jazz.
The results have not been great. However, the Nuggets have been sent home by the Lakers twice, and Melo has progressively gotten better in the playoff runs. It is also difficult to tell how good Carmelo could be considering he really only got help in the form of Kenyon Martin and Chauncey Billups two years ago while, before that, it had essentially been a one-man show for Melo.
Perhaps Anthony is a fader; a guy who shrinks away when the heat (no pun intended) is turned on. But, maybe he is a caged lion, waiting to get a chance to control his own destiny.
What I would want to know at this point, if I were the Nuggets or the Knicks, or even the Nets, is does Melo even want the responsibilty of finding that out? Is he ready for the challenge, or does he want to join Lebron and Dwayne in easy-ville.
I hope, for the league's sake, Melo is one of the guys who wants to establish his own legacy. I hope Durant and Paul and Wall and Evans and any of the other soon-to-be stars of the league do as well. I hope we get a time when rivalries are established, when players are less friendly and more competitive, and when "team" means more than three buddies playing alley oop for paychecks.
We'll see what the Knicks do in the coming months. What I want to see, what I want to hear from anyone at all, is for someone to stand up and say "oh, that's nice for the Heat. Now I'm going to go out there and beat the sh*t out of them."
Anyone ready to step up to the challenge?

Gilbert played his own part in Lebron mess

I find Lebron James to be about as vile a testament to self-absorption and unprofessionalism as there possibly could be in our society.

His one-hour ESPN farce to announce where he was taking his “talents” showed him to be a 12-year-old boy in a 25-year-old man's body, and revealed the once revered athlete as nothing more than a egotist either unaware or uncaring of what his actions might do to others.

His refusal to take on the challenge of being the focal point of a championship run in Cleveland, New York, or Chicago show's him to be a basketball follower, ready to hand the responsibility of winning a ring to his friend Dwayne Wade. But, his decision to not even look his former employer, Dan Gilbert, in the eye to inform him he was leaving the Cavaliers after seven years where James was treated like a god, given every perk he could imagine, and paid hansomely for his services, reveals him to be a coward. The fact that he didn't even give the team a heads up before his “surprise” announcement and had a lacky hanger-on call Gilbert only minutes before announcing it live to the world, is further evidence that Bron Bron doesn't have the stomach to stand face to face with another man and deliver difficult news.

In response, Gilbert delivered what will go down in history as one of the most explosive rants against a former player. The message was so rambling, cutting from accusations against Lebron that he quit on games to calling down curses and hexes from the heavens, that it appeared at times to have been a stream-of-consciouness email that was never intended for the light of day. In fact, ESPN reporters were forced to do something they hadn't bothered with for more than a month: they confirmed the letter actually came from Gilbert before releasing its contents.

In one way, I understand and applaud Gilbert. That was a letter that represented Cleveland fans everywhere. Gilbert, the owner, said what his paying customers were feeling. As a football Giants fan, myself, the most encouraged I have been in my team was when, after last year's collapse at the end of the season, owner John Marra came out and essentially said “we will never see something like that happen again while I am here.” Too many owners check data sheets and bottom lines at the end of the season. It's why franchises like the Pittsburgh Pirates in baseball, or Detroit Lions in football, have wallowed in mediocrity for so long. Owners rarely show the type of emotion Gilbert did last week and when it is revealed that ownership cares as much about winning as the fans, it is heartening.

However, there is also a part of me that looks at Gilbert and wonders if he understands the part he may have played in what transpired last week.

From all accounts, Lebron James was essentially given free rein to do whatever it was he wanted to do while with the Cavs. He had little or no rules which had to be followed. Unqualified friends were given high-paying jobs within the organization, and other Lebron lackies were allowed to fly with the team, and live the NBA life, all to appease The King. While no specifics have been provided, it is believed that Lebron influenced player acquisitions, pushing for certain guys to be signed or even traded. That kind of ill-informed influence may have ended up putting the Cavs in a position where their roster was both shaky and inflexible, making winning a difficult proposition.

The more glaring problem is the attitude that was cultivated under Cavs management. By allowing Lebron to “rule the roost” it also allowed him to essentially remain perpetually a teenager. He was living his high-school life. No one was there to smack him on the hand and say “no.” If he wanted a new teammate, he got one. If he wanted a job for a buddy, they got one. If he wanted anything, Gilbert and the Cavs bent over themselves to make it happen.

While Gilbert might have thought such actions would engender loyalty or appreciation, all it did was empower Lebron to feel even more indispensible and entitled. Considering James had been handed everything he could want since his days in middle school, it didn't take much cow-cowing on the part of Gilbert to turn him into self-absorbed monster.

There's not a doubt in my mind that Gilbert would have had a better chance of keeping Lebron if he had played father rather than brown-nose friend. James has enough of those and could easily discard one and pick up another like he were going through Kleenex. If Gilbert had layed down the law, put some shackles on Lebron, brought in some respected veterans to show the “kid” right from wrong, and made it clear that greatness was inside Lebron, but with that came great responsibility, it seems far more likely he would have been showed a level of respect James, on his own, was incapable of showing.

Gilbert's letter, while striking a cord with so many that found the Lebron spectacle utterly distasteful, and while being thuroughly entertaining, also can't be taken that seriously. It reaks of a scorned lover, who showered praise and gifts upon their partner, only to find that person escaping to the arms of another.

Gilbert fed the Lebron ego. He catered to it. He never questioned it or tried to contain it for fear that any dissent would force James and his entourage out the door. Yet, after all that was handed to him, he still left because, just like it was with the Cavs, it was about James and no one else in the end.

Two trade the Knicks should make

It seems all the focus has been on the Knicks either trading for or signing Carmelo Anthony the last few days in Knicks land, as the attention slowly moves from the 2010 free agent debacle to the future possibilities.
However, I would still prefer the Knicks trade for Chris Paul and I think it could be done.
Now, both the Nuggets and Hornets have said their top stars are off limits, however it may become very clear that neither team can surround their guys with the types of teams that will convince them to sign extensions in the next month to a year. The Hornets seem to be more cash strapped than the Nuggets, and Paul has been the more vocal about wanting to "see something" from his front office or possibly demanding a trade. Something just tells me that Paul might be the first one to make such a stink about leaving, the Hornets have no choice but to listen.
If that happened, here is what I would do:
I would trade Danillo Gallinari, Wilson Chandler, Anthony Randolph, and Eddy Curry for Chris Paul and Emeka Okafor. Money wise, the Knicks would be sending the Hornets about $18.6 million and getting back $26.3 million.
Why would the Hornets do this?
It gives them two very good young players in Gallinari and Randolph, but guys around 20-years-old who have a lot of upside, a solid young guy in Chandler, and the expiring contract of Eddy Curry. It gives them salary cap flexibility. They also have Darren Collison, who was sensational last year when Paul was out, so it would allow them to cushion the blow of losing Paul by promoting Collison as a possible star in his own right.
Why would the Knicks do this?
They get the best point guard in the league, when healthy. Under Mike D'Antoni, Paul could equal Steve Nash in terms of production and maturation. His numbers could be off the charts, and one could only salivate at the thought of Paul and Amare Stoudemire running the pick and roll to perfection game in and game out. Plus, it gives the Knicks their face of the organization. Paul, by all accounts, is a good guy with a killer desire to win and a tendency to get intimately involved with the community. You could plaster Paul's face all over the city and he would instantly become one of the biggest sports stars around.
You would also get a borderline all star in Okafor. I had thought Okafor would be a better player by this time, putting up Al Jefferson numbers of 20/10 on a regular basis, but, besides last year in New Orleans, he has been a 14/11 guy with two blocks a game. In D'Antoni's offense, Okafor wouldn't get a lot of looks, but he is a terrific rebounder, very good defender, and he can easily run the floor in a high-powered offense (he comes from Uconn, which was a transition-style offense in college, where he helped win a national title). He is also a great put-back offensive player and would probably average a double-double in a more up tempo offense.

Bringing in Paul would mean that newly-signed Raymond Felton wouldn't have a position (he doesn't shoot it well enough to play the two) so I would follow the Paul trade with this:
Trade Raymond Felton and Ronny Turiaf for Andre Igudola and Marreese Speights. Money wise, the Knicks would be sending $15.3 million to the 76ers and getting $13.8 million in return.
Why would the 76ers do this deal?
While the 76ers would be taking back more money then they would be sending, Felton's deal is only for two years so, in the long run, it would provide more cap flexibility as the Igudola contract is for, I believe, another four years. Plus, it would allow the 76ers to move everyone to their more obvious spots on the floor. Jrue Holiday, slated to be the point guard, is a more natural two, as is Igudola. This trade would allow the 76ers to play Felton at the point, Holiday at the two, and top draft pick Evan Turner at the three. Since Holiday and Turner are similar in style and size, they can move back and forth between the two and three, depending on matchups. It would also give them a tough, veteran center to play along side Elton Brand at power forward.
Why would the Knicks do this deal?
Felton becomes expendable once Paul joins the team. Turiaf is a nice fit for the Knicks but, with Okafor, the only thing the Knicks would need is a serviceable big man to spell him and, perhaps, play some power forward, which Speights would provide.
With Igudola, he was billed in Philly as the go-to option, but he hasn't shown the kind of consistency to do that. However, with the Knicks, he would slide in as the third option on the team, an athletic two-guard to complement Paul and Stoudemire. He is a slasher, is wonderful in the open, and would thrive in the run and gun style of D'Antoni.
Under this scenario, the Knicks would be a few hundred thousand beyond the salary cap, which could easily be maneuvered around by Walsh (a little cash sent here, there, and that should be fine). It would leave the bench suspect unless guys like Tony Douglas and Jerome Jordan showed they were top players, but the starting five would be Chris Paul (PG), Andre Igudola (SG), Keleena Azubuike (SF), Amare Stoudemire (PF), Emeka Okafor (C). Your bench would be Tony Douglas (PG), Bill Walker (SG/SF), Jerome Jordan (PF/C), Marreese Speights (PF/C), Andy Rautins (SG).
Like I said, the bench on that team is suspect, although I like what you saw from Douglas last year and Walker, both of whom could be major contributors. However, that starting five could be as explosive as any in the entire league, and I believe could challenge for a spot in the East Finals. You would worry a little about defense, although Igudola would be a terrific defender and Azubuike can be a top defender as well, but it would be hard to name teams better than that squad.

Goodnight, NBA

Could there have been a worse couple of weeks for the NBA than what we just "witnessed"?
It sounds strange because, for the first time since Shaquille O'Neill decided to abandon Orlando for the Lakers, we were talking about The Association in the beginning of summer.
Usually, around this time of year, the NBA would be mentioned only as an afterthought, with the occassional trade news or extension announcement. Instead, from the end of the playoffs till now, it has been all NBA, and all free agency, all the time.
But, despite pithy cliched sayings to the contrary, not all publicity is good publicity.
In America today, it is fairly easy to single out the NFL as the most popular sport in the land. It is the nation's passion. It is an every-Sunday event in the fall and winter, and no other sport comes close to matching its interest at the national level.
Coming in a strong second is the nation's passtime. Baseball, despite the much talked about "competitive imbalance" generates interest at an astounding rate, especially in the nation's biggest markets and cities. Despite a lagging economy, ratings remain high, attendance has not bottomed out, and people still follow their teams every move.
The NBA has been wallowing in third place, a distant third, in terms of interest, for a long time.
The nation's overall apathy has been linked to several different factors over the years. Some claim that the departure of Michael Jordan, who took the baton of excellence from Larry Bird and Magic Johnson and kept the NBA interesting and provocative, set the league back and a lack of another "successor" to that excellence has made the sport less interesting. Others point to a more insidious reason, believeing that white America remains turned off to a sport that is dominated by African American players.
Whatever the reason, the NBA has remained a strong presence in American sports, and its top players have continued to be marketable and recognizable, but the sports overall popularity has trailed the other two leagues.
There has been great hope at the end of the tunnel, however.
The Lakers have remained a dominate force, employing, first, the charismatic big man Shaq and, now, the controversial yet splendidly talented Kobe Bryant. The Celtics pulled off one of the great double moves of all time, and paired Ray Allen, Kevin Garnett, and Paul Pierce together to form an incredible threesome that brought the stories Celtics team back to prominence. Oh,  by the way, the Lakers and Celtics, by far the best rivalry in the NBA, have played against each other in two of the last three finals.
And then you had the new face of the NBA.
Lebron James was the basketball playing version of The Natural. His talents are off the charts. He is a 6'9" freight train with shooting touch and one of the great finishing moves the game has ever seen. There is both a grace and a brutality to his talent that makes him unique.
He also has been relatively free from controversy in his seven years in the league. Unlike Kobe Bryant, who appeared surly and selfish on the court, and had a dark allegation thrown at him off the court, James appeared to be the epitome of unselfish, team-first play on the court, a good teammate and model citizen off it. Add to that his "home town boy makes good" story and his supposed allegiance to Cleveland, a city that has known nothing but sports heartbreak, and it was easy to root for Lebron.
Though Kobe has proven time and time again that he, not Lebron, is the guy you want taking the last shot and playing in the big game, Lebron remained the most popular and well-liked, and ultimately marketable, player in the sport, and one of the most recognizable celebrity faces in the world.
That was yesterday.
Today, in the NBA, is very different. Lebron is no longer the face of the NBA so much as he is the villian. His decision, and more consequentially the process by which he came to his decision, has cast him as everything wrong with sports while, for so long, he was depicted as everything right with them. His playful attitude now, suddenly, seems self indulgent and borderline unprofessional.
Perhaps it was inevitable that, after choosing Miami over Cleveland, the negative stories would emerge. The Cavs painted Lebron as the "savior" and their near divine worship of his talents were punctuated by the semi-insulting "We Are All Witnesses" billboards that lined their city's skyline. So, when we hear that Lebron was a "quitter" or that his actions were always selfish and narcissistic, one has to wonder how much of the information is true and how much is sour grapes.
Yet, after the display of the last few weeks, it is difficult to give Lebron the benefit of the doubt. The stories of Lebron's influence on the Cavs decisions, and his insistence on special treatment for he and his friends, seem to fit nicely in the story we have watched unfold before us.
Whatever the case, no one is truly in a position to WANT to believe the best about Lebron now, anyway. So, the face of the NBA, the needed successor to Michael Jordan, both in wins and popularity has been more than stained: he has been utterly dismantled.
If you add to that the shaky performance of Dwayne Wade, who made the same comical tour of franchises, though it appears likely now that he had no intention of leaving Miami, introduced his family as an element in his decision making process, then seemed to forget all about that factor when resigning with Miami, and hired a documentary crew to follow he and Chris Bosh around as they made their "decision," and argueably the NBA's two most likeable stars presented themselves as the most egotistical of athletes the nation has ever seen.
There are obviously practical problems for the NBA latent in Lebron's decision.
The lack of James in Cleveland all but devastates the Cavaliers and basketball in that city, and nearly does the same in New York, the NBA's biggest and argueably most important market. It puts two of the top three or four players in the league on the same team. And, in a sport so completely dominated by stars, it pitches the balance of power substantially in one direction, and onto a team and a city that has little basketball tradition and a notoriously apathetic fanbase.
Some will say that this move is little different than the Yankees and their "all star at every position" philosophy in baseball, but the difference is pronounced. In baseball, the playoffs are a crapshoot every season. Being the best team guarantees nothing. Despite their talent, the Yankees or Red Sox or Rays or Phillies could easily be picked off by a "lesser" team, especially if they have top starting pitching and reliable bullpen guys.
In basketball, the better, more talented team almost always wins. That's why, in a league that has designed, both in terms of the draft and salary cap structure, to help small markets compete with big ones, there is little parity in terms of competition. While it is rare teams win back-to-back titles in baseball, and almost unheard of in football, basketball produces back-to-back champs on a fairly consistent basis. In the last 30 years, there have been 13 separate occassions where one team has one two or more straight titles, and, even more startling, in those 30 years only seven different teams have won titles.
Compare that to baseball where, in the past 30 years, 20 different teams have won, and it becomes clear that the best team, with the most talent, rarely loses in the NBA.
It will be interesting to see how this all plays out, and if the Heat can turn a fantasy league lineup of three guys into an actual "team," but there is a good chance this group could dominate, and do so for a long time.
Considering the tarnish that is now on Wade and Lebron, how many people are going to care that the Heat are the beasts of the NBA in two years? No one outside of Miami, and that isn't exactly exciting news for David Stern.
Perhaps this lights a fire under certain teams. Maybe the Knicks, after licking their wounds from not getting Lebron, make a deal to bring in Chris Paul and build a team that can topple the Heat troika. Maybe Derrick Rose, sick of being referred to simply as a piece that would help James or Wade attain greatness, helps the Bulls mature into a juggernaut. Maybe the allure of playing in his hometown of Brooklyn entices Carmelo Anthony to join the Nets, with their cast of young players, and maybe the Celtics old guard has one more run in them and Kobe and the Lakers show that it takes more than just three guys to win.
Regardless, what has happened here will seriously dampen any momentum the league had obtained over the last few years, and it won't take long to notice. Stern and his minions might have been dancing over the extraordinary interest their league generated, but it will have been a very large price to pay.
If you want to know why, in three years, the NBA is talking about having to regenerate interest in its league, look to June 22-July 8 for the answer.

No matter what, this isn't a positive for the NBA

The current word, which follows so many meaningless and mind-numbing words that have come before, is that Lebron James is joining Dwayne Wade and Chris Bosh in Miami for some sort of South Beach career party, that is expected to begin tonight in Greenwich, CT, and end sometime in June 2011, with a Championship parade.
That's the word.
Now, if you've been following “the word” over the last several weeks, you'll know that the current word probably doesn't carry any more water than the previous word. It is just another in a long line of unconfirmed rumors about where King James might play next. People are using the phrase “done deal” for what might be the 300th time in this process,. We have heard it was a “done deal” Lebron was headed to Chicago, then back home to Cleveland, now to Miami. The only time this will be “done” will be when James announces it all himself.
But, for the sake of argument, let's say Lebron has made up his mind to go to Miami. Let's say he is joining Wade and Bosh. How will that come off tonight?
It makes a man who has represented himself as a meglomaniacal middle-school kid look more like a heartless villian, and a coward.
No matter where Lebron decides to go, if it isn't the Cavs, he will justifiably be crucified for holding an hour-long special just to break the hearts of Cleveland faithful. This has been detailed already. It's one thing to decide Cleveland no longer is the place for him. I can understand that. It is another thing to break your former fans' hearts on national television, after letting them twist in the wind for weeks. It is more than just childishly self-absorded. It is mean spirited. No matter how full of oneself a person is, they have to recognize how their actions will effect others. In this case, it would be obvious that James just doesn't care.
Now, the other team in this mix, the other franchise that has done all to land Lebron, is the Knicks. Donnie Walsh and Mike D'Antoni sold an entire New York fanbase on the idea of a two-year plan that would involve blowing up the roster more times than a scene from The Hurt Locker in order to clear cap space. While a Lebron snub wouldn't devastate New York the way it would Cleveland, they are a close second. Chicago has Derrick Rose, Luol Deng, Joakim Noah, and just added Carlos Boozer. The Nets have a talented group of young players, a new billionaire Russian owner, and a pending move to Brooklyn. The Clippers never really thought they were in this to begin with.
The Knicks, on the other hand, have literally no where to go if Lebron chooses somewhere else.
Now, what would make the snub even worse is the site of tonight's nonsense. If you don't plan to spend the next decade of your life trying to bring a championship back to New York, why in the world would you hold the press conference in Greenwich, which is literally miles away from the Knicks home and might as well be a suburb of New York? Why come to that team's backyard just to pledge allegiance to the Heat? Why rub in the overwhelming disappointment in that way?
The idea that, well, Carmelo Anthony's wedding is in New York this weekend, so he was coming here anyway is absurd. This is a multi millionaire. If he had plans to come to the New York area this weekend, he could have held his press conference in Akron, or, heck, in Des Moines, and been on a plane to the Big Apple before midnight struck. Why does this need to be in Greenwich if he doesn't intend on playing anywhere near Greenwich in the future? (Oh, and by the way, there are plenty of Boys and Girls clubs in the country to choose from, so landing at that one isn't an excuse either.)
If, tonight, Lebron announces it's Miami, he will have needlessly insulted the two fan bases that have suffered the most in anticipation of his decision. The Cavs would be devastated. The Knicks would almost equal in their despair. Both cities would have little on which to hang their hope. And, by Lebron doing this so publically, and doing it from such a telling location, it would be the ultimate slap in the face.
But, that's about Lebron the man. What about Lebron, the player?
To me, going to Miami would be the ultimate coward move.
It is gutless.
Is there a bigger “I can't be the man” statement than running after your buddy, Dwayne Wade, to let him do all the heavy lifting in a run to the championship, while you sit back, collect a few double-doubles, and high-five Chris Bosh when Wade makes a clutch shot?
And please, spare us the “this proves Lebron only wants to win” nonsense. If he had guts, he would go someplace and compete AGAINST Wade and Bosh, try and carve out his own niche, and not try and ride on their coattails.
This isn't the NFL or MLB. In those sports, one guy doesn't make the difference. The Pittsburgh Pirates would still be a woeful team, even if they signed Albert Pujols tomorrow. The Cleveland Browns would maybe win a few more games, but not a playoff game, even if they signed Tom Brady. You have to build teams there.
In the NBA, one player can make a world of difference. Put Lebron on ANY team in the league and they are a winner. That's how much one guy can mean.
Now, great players are well within their right to demand some help. As has been said numerous times, Jordan didn't win without Pippen, Bryant didn't win without Shaq or Gasol. You need that second guy, and then role players, in order to truly be a championship team.
No one should blame Lebron if, ultimately, he either left Cleveland, or demanded action in Cleveland, in order to play along side another top teammate. But, running after someone who is argueably just as good, another alpha dog, to his city, to try and ride his coattails to victory? That is simply resignation to the fact that you will not be able to do it as the main cog. That is turning in your Batman outfit for the Robin yellow and red because it is a lot less stressful.
So, if Lebron announces Miami tonight, what do we know?
We know he is an egotist the likes of which would make Terrell Owens blush. We know he is heartless because, with his one-hour special and designated location, he will have willfully, and unnecessarily middle fingered the two organizations who sacrificed the most to try and earn his services, and we know he is gutless because he will have tamely followed his championship-pedigree friend to Miami to try and pick up a few championships as they fall from Wade's fingers.
What a sad day for the NBA if Lebron is making South Beach his home.

Teams that should be good.

Before I get to my main point, let me say one thing about the Lebron James sweepstakes. I hope, with all my heart, that he leaves Cleveland and goes someplace else.
I can't tell you how utterly absurd I find the Cleveland "pitch" to Lebron. Essentially, the Cavaliers have said "come back to us, or you'll have blood on your hands." Their entire sales pitch to this man has been to try and guilt him into coming back, as if Lebron owes Cleveland or the Cavs something.
To me, Cleveland is now that mentally unstable girlfriend (or boyfriend, depending on who is reading this:) who senses the breakup is coming, so threatens to do bodily harm to his or herself if it does happen. The relationship continues, not because both sides want it, but because one side is afraid of "hurting" the other.If Lebron returns to Cleveland, I fully believe it will be because, and only because, he has been convinced he "has to do it" for the sake of the town. What a despicable way to try and appeal to someone.
Obviously, they can't appeal to their roster, or their ability to make moves because, well, they don't have a great roster or the ability to make moves. They also don't have a city that has ever shown an ability to not only build a championship team, but sustain such a team. So, when all else fails, try and make the person feel so bad about leaving, they end up staying. You know how long that works? It works right up to the point where guilt turns into resentment.
I have wanted to see Lebron head East because, if he played for the Knicks or the Nets, it would make the NBA a whole lot more interesting for me. I can't really tell you that, if the Knicks trot out Amare Stoudemire and Tony Parker next year, along with Mike Miller, that I will suddenly be looking into season tickets.
But, after hearing how pathetically desparate the Cavs pitch sounded, and how they seem to be the only team to use guilt (and also the only team seemingly willing to disparage other teams and their officials) I hope he goes anywhere else. Sign with New Jersey, Knicks, Chicago, Miami, heck, even the Clippers. Just, don't go back to Cleveland, Lebron. Don't let the NBA equivalent of the psycho girlfriend win your services.

Okay, enough of my rant.
The Lebron thing got me thinking about teams looking for a new start. See, the Knicks are a team that has been down on its luck for a very long time now, yet is an essential part of the NBA landscape. The Knicks have the history, the arena, and the fan base. What they haven't had is the success.
So, I began to contemplate which teams are in most need of a turn around in each of the major American sports. If I sat Roger Goodell, David Stern, Bud Selig, and Gary Bettman down in a secret room and asked them "which teams would you most like to see back on top" I think they would all have a list of teams.
For this post, I have limited it to the two franchises per sport I believe are most important to the league, and more in need of improvement (along with some honorable mentions).

NBA

1.) New York Knicks - The Celtics are good and should be at least for a few more years. The Lakers are at the top of the league. The Bulls are up and coming and could improve dramatically this offseason. The Mavericks always seem to be one break, or one personnel move away from being a top team.
The NBA has had a revival of sorts lately because a.) for the first time in years their young, talented players have been interesting and charismatic (and relatively free from any off-the-court problems) and b.) they have some very good teams in large markets.
Yes, the NBA is star-driven, meaning that they don't necessarily have to have their big market clubs succeed in order to prosper. However, despite the fact that Tim Duncan is one of the all-time great players in league history, and Dwight Howard is as exciting a young player as we have seen in years, the league ratings, especially in the playoffs, have been hurt by having smaller market clubs dominate.
That's why, despite what David Stern might say publically, it is hard to believe that, privately, he isn't rooting for the Knicks to come up winners in this free agent sweepstakes. Cleveland is a nice city and all, but the NBA has survive quite nicely over the years by having a less than competitive team in that area, as has every other sports league. Let's face it, few, if any analysts have ever uttered the words "the league could really use a big-time team/player in Cleveland."
If Lebron James were to defect to New York, people would lament the death of basketball in the Cleveland area, and villify James for "taking the money" in New York. However, after a few weeks, it would become clear that everyone in the league was doing hand stands.
New York is the biggest market in the world, Madison Square Garden one of the most famous in sports, and the Knicks are one of the teams, even after years of futility, that springs to mind when talking about the NBA. Having exciting games in MSG come May and June would be a huge boon to the league. You can have your Oklahoma City's and San Antonio's and Utah's playing top basketball, as long as your big markets are also at the top. The league needs the Knicks and, for their sake, hopefully they get a nice Fourth of July present this season.

2.) Philadelphia 76ers - It hasn't been that long since the 76ers were a playoff team, but it feels like it. The team made the playoffs in the 2004/05 season, but were swept out by the Detroit Pistons. Since then, and the trade of Allen Iverson to the Denver Nuggets, Philly has been devoid of basketball excitement and, just as important, devoid of any big-time players.
Philadelphia, even though they have not won a championship in many years, has been the home to some of the greats of the game. Wilt Chamberlain was a 76er, as was Moses Malone, as was Charles Barkley, as was Allen Iverson. These are not just nice players who put up good numbers, these are, all of them, hall of famers who helped shape the league at different stages of its maturation.
Having the 76ers struggle now for the league is somewhat like having the Celtics struggling, as they did, a few years back. Now, the C's are one of the two signature franchises in the sport, so having them on track is of utmost importance, but getting the 76ers back up to speed would certainly help as well.
We will see whether Evan Turner, Philly's most current draft pick, helps to rebuild the franchise or if he turns into a nice piece to the eventual puzzle, but the NBA is certainly hoping that, in the next few years, there is, once again, excitement for basketball in Philly.

Honorable mentions - Indiana Pacers (not a big market, but nothing says basketball like the state of Indiana), Portland Trailblazers (well on their way to being a contender again), New Orleans Hornets (after the success of the Saints in the NFL, no doubt the NBA would love to see its product turn into a success in the Big Easy).

NFL

1.) Oakland Raiders - We all know that the league still hates Al Davis. There are a bunch of former coaches and players who hate Al Davis. There is a good chance that God hates Al Davis. However, for the biggest, most successful sports league in perhaps the world, having a bad team in the Los Angeles/California Bay area is not good.
The Raiders are one of the most marketable and recognizable teams in the NFL. That skull and bones logo, by itself, is enough to ship a few million jerseys and hats. Yet, since John Gruden left and Rich Gannon retired years ago, the Raiders have become a laughing stock. Their draft picks have been utterly useless and the latest disaster, JeMarcus Russell, joins Ryan Leaf as perhaps the worst draft pick of the last 30 years. There might a little excitement now that the Raiders grabbed a decent quarterback, Jason Campbell, who might bring stability to that offense, but they still seem a long way from being major national contenders.

2.) San Francisco 49ers - What is amazing is that, when I contemplated the teams to include on this list, a good amount came to mind, which really tells you how teflon the NFL has become when it can thrive on teams like the Indianapolis Colts being a top draw. For the NBA I went East-Coast centric, here is is West Coast.
The 49ers might make the jump back into promience this season but, for a team that went from Joe Montana to Steve Young without missing a beat, and dominated the league for more than a decade. Now, they have to find a way to turn Alex Smith into a top quarterback and get their offense running smoothly. It might end up happening this season, but the NFL would sure love some exciting games in Candlestick in the near future.

Honorable mentions - Washington Redskins (this was my other obvious choice to make the top two, but I went with the 49ers instead), Chicago Bears (were in the Super Bowl a few years later, so avoid top two consideration, but still a team looking for a return to dominance), Miami Dolphins (they have been a playoff team a few times here, but haven't been a franchise challenging for a title in many, many years).

MLB

1.) Chicago Cubs - There is no stranger team in sports than the Cubs. Think about it; their entire history is one of losing. They are the Clippers or, before recently, the Arizona Cardinals of the NFL. They are a team going on 102 years of futility.
Yet, they are one of the most popular, and important teams in baseball. They, along with the Dodgers, Yankees, and Red Sox, are the team you think of when major league baseball is mentioned in passing.
If the Cubs could ever become a team challenging for a title every year, what a boom that would be for MLB. The interest in the team is already there. How much more would it shoot up if they were actually good?
MLB did, in my opinion, a horrid thing a few years back when it essentially blocked Mark Cuban from buying the organization. Cuban, the owner of the Dallas Mavericks, has proven to be one of the best business men in sports, a players kind of guy willing to spend to help a team win and, ultimately, make himself money. Is there any doubt Cuban would have turned the Cubs into a winner?
Instead, the Cubbies are left out to dangle with another "corporate" ownership group which is likely to run the team with a constant eye on bottom line.
What a shame.
The Red Sox got their championship after nearly 100 years of futility, as did the White Sox. The last kid on the loser block remains the Cubs. Baseball would love to see them get off the hump.

2.) Baltimore Orioles - Couple of teams to choose from for the second selection here, but I am going with the Orioles for a couple of reasons. First, they have a great baseball town, one of the best in the sport. Second, they still have one of the best ballparks in baseball that, when the team is good, will be sold out every single time. Third, they are in a market that should support a team producing a high payroll. Fourth, this is a team with a lot of history.
There are certain teams in baseball that, in my opinion, are in a desparate need of relocation (Rays, A's), but the Orioles could be easily successful right where they are. They are a product of horrid management and decision making and the people of that terrific baseball season deserve a lot better.

Honorable mentions - Kansas City Royals (the years of George Brett seem a long time ago and, despite their inclusion in the small market discussion, should be able to support a much better team), Pittsburgh Pirates (17 years of futility, but a good baseball town, great park, and a tradition of winning), Seattle Mariners (not a team you think of as being one of the traditional powers, but another team in a very good market, great city, great ballpark, great fanbase, and one that could easily have consistent success if run correctly).

NHL

1.) New York Rangers - I will readily admit that this is the sport where I have the least historical knowledge, but it doesn't take Bobby Ore's son to know the Rangers don't exactly have a stacked trophy case when it comes to Lord Stanley. Yet, as 1994 showed the world, the Rangers being a top team and winning can do wonders for the NHL as a whole.
Also, for a sport desparate to grow its product, not having the largest market in America is not something easily overcome. The NHL needs New York in play in order to kick start any emergence. That probably won't happen with the Panthers or the Ducks leading the way.

2.) Edmonton Oilers - I know they went to the finals in 2006, but it has been 16 years since the last time they had reached that stage, and it has now been 20 years since the team Wayne Gretzky made famous in the late 70s, early 80s won a title. NHL hockey is as much, or more Canada's game as it is Americas, and having a top teams in that part of the world is important to the league's overall success. They need big markets in America, and their Canadien teams to be good, and the Oilers are one of those teams that has tradition and fan passion. Having them return to the point where they routinely challenge for a title would be nothing but good for the league.

Honorable mentions - New York Islanders (Long Island's only team has tradition and brings with it parts of New York which, as already explained, is important), LA Kings (Gretzky's second home, would potentially bring the LA market).

(Note: only went with two because some of the leagues most important teams, such as the Boston Bruins, Montreal Canadiens, Philadelphia Flyers, and Chicago Blackhawks, all had big runs in the playoffs this year, so it was impossible to rate them as teams that "need to improve.")