A Melo State Of Mind?

There are a few different things at work when it comes to this Carmelo Anthony situation. First, I think we can all agree that Anthony is kind of a bitch in this silly passion play. He is pushing to go to a team that has been a doormat for a decade and leave a team that, despite not going to an NBA Final since he arrived, has been a competitive team that has shown the ability to build a quality squad around their star player. Even though the Knicks are in a significantly better situation now than they were a few years ago, and you could make the case that New York, over the next year or two is in a better shape to win than Denver, it still doesn't discount a few obvious facts: Denver has a better coach in George Karl who actually values defense, rather than Mike D'Antoni and his "just score" mentality; the East, with the Big Three in Miami, a rising team in Chicago, an always talented yet head-scratchingly erratic Orlando, and the ever-present Boston might offer a tougher road to the finals over the next three years than the West, with an aging Lakers and Spurs, and no GREAT team waiting in the wings; and, though the Nuggets front office is new and hasn't established any kind of resume, the Knicks appear ready to usher in the Isiah Thomas 2.0 era, and how could that be anything other than shitty?

Carmelo wants the Knicks because they are in New York. Pure and simple.

The second thing at play here is Denver. It seems to me like they may end up trading Carmelo for more than anyone originally thought (to the Knicks, that is) yet, are they burning bridges in the process? Everyday we hear they have a "deal in place" with someone, then it seems they move the goalposts a little further down the field. They also seem to be using the Nets to get more from the Knicks, something I can't imagine is making the Nets all that happy.

Look, if the Nuggets have a bonafide, frachise-changing piece ala Carmelo, teams will deal with them. Teams will deal with anyone when that is the case. You think anybody WANTS to spend time with Scott Boras when it comes to baseball negotiations? Of course not. But, when he represents the best of the best, you have to talk. Where I think all this back-and-forth could hurt the Nuggets is when they are trying to move smaller pieces to improve their club. Will other teams be reluctant, seeing how they treated both the Knicks and the Nets, and seemed hell-bent on not just getting a good deal, but using any means necessary just to pick up a few more assets? If they need to shed some salary, will other teams shy away from deals? Who knows, but Denver certainly seems to be willing to jerk a lot of people around, all in the name of adding fairly insignificant pieces. It almost seems as if the Nuggets are looking to hurt the other team in the deal as much, or more, than help their team.

The final thing at play here is how, if the Knicks pull this deal off, they might be in a position to build a "super team" in the East to join Miami. It isn't hard to imagine the Knicks could clear enough space to sign Chris Paul after the 2012 season, if they have a 2012 season. That would give them an even more balanced all-star team than Miami. That will certainly be good for New York, and a good team in New York will certainly be good for the league, but is that healthy for the league?

People can complain about baseball all they want, screaming about the lack of a salary cap and the haves and have nots of the sport. Yet, baseball is a game played by nine individuals. You can add whatever piece, even two pieces that you want and if you don't have good talent at all spots on the team, you're not winning, pure and simple. In basketball, one or two players can DOMINATE, and it usually means a monopoly on winning. 

Look at these numbers: In the last 20 years, 13 different teams have won the World Series. In the NBA, six different teams have won a championship. More than twice the amount of teams have won a championship in baseball than in basketball. Also, consider this: in the NBA, you had teams win two or more straight championships five times while, in Major League Baseball, only the Blue Jays and Yankees won multiple championships in consecutive years.

The point? In basketball, dominant teams DOMINATE. Over a period of years, a team that builds a top contender usually wins multiple times in a row. The Bulls under Jordan won six titles in nine years. The Rockets, with Hakeem, won back-to-back. The Lakers won three straight with Kobe and Shaq, then just won two straight with Kobe and Gasol. That doesn't even take into account the fact that San Antonio, with Dave Robinson and Tim Duncan, than the Duncan, Parker, Ginolbli combo, has won three championships in that time, just never back-to-back. 

If the Knicks get a Chris Paul to go along with Melo and Amar'e, is there any doubt the East will be dominated by two or three teams for the next decade or more? Say goodnight if you're the 76ers, Bobcats, Pacers, or anyone else. You won't sniff an Eastern Conference Final.

But, in the end, this comes down to a trade. Would you, if you're the Knicks, make the trade that has been proposed: Raymond Felton, Danillo Gallinari, Wilson Chandler, Eddy Curry (expiring contract), and a first-round pick) acquired from Minnesota for Anthony Randolph) for Melo, Chauncey Billups, and a few throw-ins to make the math work.

My answer: absolutely. Even if the Knicks have to include Timothy Mozgov, I would run for that deal. Yeah, it's a lot, but the way I look at a trade, I have to ask "who is leaving, who is coming, and who is irreplaceable?" By that account, the Knicks get back the only irreplaceable player in the entire deal: Carmelo. If the deal includes Gallinari (there is some talk that the Knicks would be willing to include Mozgov but would then replace Gallinari with Fields), Melo replaces Gallinari. Big win for the Knicks. Billups is older and his best years are behind him, but he is still a valuable player and you would have to consider a Felton, Billups swap a push, especially considering Felton probably wasn't a long-term solution at point guard anyway. The Knicks won't get anything back to replace Chandler, a valuable sixth man, but is he an irreplaceable talent? No way. And, since the Knicks don't have a first-round pick next year, anyway, there would be nothing gained, nothing lost in giving one up if acquired for Randolph. Even if the Knicks replaced Gallo with Fields and included Mozgov, again, there would be nothing in that deal that wouldn't be replaceable either through the draft or free agency.

Just think about it. Here are the two potential starting fives for the Knicks if they pull off one of these two deals:

Billups PG

Fields SG

Melo SF

Amar'e PF

Mozgov C

or

Billups PG

Gallo SG

Melo SF

Amar'e PF

Touriaf C

Now, I don't think either of those two teams beats the Celtics or the Bulls, but either one is better than the Felton, Fields, Gallo, Amar'e, Mozgov starting five right now. The two biggest problems for this year, in which the Knicks will probably go to the playoffs, is that a.) the new guys won't be familiar with the D'Antoni system and b.) there won't be much of a bench. But, again, the Knicks weren't winning a championship this year, anyway. Why not put Melo with Amar'e and start building around that now? 

Personally, I like the second grouping, even though Fields has become a fan favorite very quickly and Movgoz has shown much more talent as of late. Teaming Melo with Gallo and Amar'e could keep the Knicks dangerous for this year. Their second unit would be pretty aweful, but their first unit could be a lot of fun to watch.

In the end, the Knicks just don't have a lot of GREAT things on their roster, so even though they would be giving up a lot, nothing is so precious as to stop a deal. This is more about quantity than quality. There is no potential superstar leaving New York in those proposed deals, and what the NBA is all about is superstars. It is much easier to add good players to a core group of great talents than to add great talent to a core group of good players. In baseball, where any one player is simply one of nine, and history shows that, usually, different teams win every year, trading half your roster for one top player isn't smart. In basketball, where one or two players can mean so much (see Cleveland minus LeBron James), gutting the roster for a premier talent is the right way to go.

Update: It appears the Knicks have drawn a line in the sand when it comes to their deal for Carmelo. I get the point. You don't want to continue to be held over the coals. But, as I stated in the post, there isn't one player on the Knicks roster not names Amar'e that is worthy of holding up, or ultimately squashing, a deal for Melo. Even if you deplete much of your team, you don't really set yourself back all that much. There isn't anything there you can't replace. There isn't anything there you can't find in the draft or free agency. If you blow up the roster for Carmelo, so be it. Here is my prediction. If the Knicks added Timothy Mozgov to this trade, and gave up Felton, Gallo, Chandler, and Mozgov, while also trading Anthony Randolph and Eddy Curry, they would be BETTER than the Nuggets in a year and would be one of the best teams in the Eastern Conference in the next two years. Not getting Carmelo is more of a hit than giving up all this. I get the sense this "line in the sand" is almost more about pride than it is about basketball because, really, unless the Nuggets mentioned Amar'e there isn't anyone on the roster the Nuggets could ask for where you wouldn't say "yeah, sure, why not?"

NL Central Preview

Let me say something about the NL Central. If MLB is going to realign, the Central has to be the pivot point. Why? For some reason, the NL Central has six teams whereas every other division in baseball, except the AL West, had five teams. There are only four teams in the AL West.
I'm sure there is a reason for this but, honestly, I don't get it. Why the hell is there one division with six teams and another with four?
Since I LOVE to move teams around, here would be my solution, which probably has nothing to do with a fairly complicated realignment proposal I made last year. Here's what I would do to even things up. It's very simple:
Move the Houston Astros to the NL West, move the Arizona Diamondbacks to the AL West.
A move to the NL West would be fine for the Astros and it would give the West divisions in each sport a team in Texas. The Diamondbacks are still relatively new in baseball so moving them isn't as dramatic as moving a team that has deeper roots in the National League. Plus, you're taking two teams that have been stuck in a rut for a while, a move would be good for both of them. And, you wouldn't have any more weird divisions, which just annoys me on a practical level. Pisses me off, actually.
Yet, until Bud Selig wakes up to my suggestions (for which I hope to be handsomely paid), the NL Central remains as is.
Without further ado, here's how I see the division breaking down:
NL Central
Cincinnati Reds
Milwaukee Brewers
St. Louis Cardinals
Chicago Cubs
Pittsburgh Pirates
Houston Astros

At the beginning of 2010 I felt like the Reds were a year away. I was prepared to pick them for the top spot in the division in 2011, but they jumped the gun. Is the Big Red Machine back for round two? I doubt it, but considering I don't love what anyone else in the division did, and I think the Reds have built one of the best young teams in the league, I see them repeating as NL Central victors.
I think Cinci is actually underrated. Joey Votto is the reining NL MVP, Brandon Phillips is one of the best second basemen in the league, Jay Bruce could be in line for a breakout year in 2011, Scott Rolen found the fountain of youth, and Edgar Renteria is coming off a year where he helped the Giants win a World Series. That's not even counting Drew Stubbs and Johnny Gomes, both of whom put up solid numbers last year and are the exact top-quality role players all good teams need. They also have depth in the pitching staff, with Edison Volquez healthy and ready to go, Johnny Cueto coming off an impressive year, Bronson Arroyo providing valuable veteran leadership, and Homer Bailey still looking to tap into his treasure trove of talents. And, of course, the bullpen will be, at least for a time, solidified by Ardolis Chapman, whose stuff looked every bit as good as advertised. Could he be a starter by the end of the year? Absolutely. Could he be the closer? Certainly. Either way, the Reds have hitting and pitching depth. Usually a good combo for success.
Behind them I am picking the Brewers. I LOVE their pitching. Think of facing this foursome when you walk into Milwaukee in 2011: Zach Greinke, Yovani Gallardo, Shawn Marcum, and veteran Randy Wolf. That aint bad at all. Consider that the Brewers will throw three pitchers, back to back to back, who were the best on their team a year ago (Greinke in Kansas City, Marcum in Toronto, and Gallardo for the Brewers). I also love Axford as the closer, taking over for retired Trevor Hoffman, who was no where near his dominant former self with the Brewers. The real question is going to be, what does Milwaukee do with Prince Fielder?
The hefty first baseman is going to get a big contract at the end of the year from someone outside of Milwaukee. They know this. Do they just hang onto him, try and win this year, and take take the draft pick at the end of the year, or do they trade him now, get something back in return to lessen the blow of losing their best power hitter? My guess is they keep him the whole year, hoping that an offense of he, Ryan Braun, Cory Hart, and Rickie Weeks is enough to make the playoffs.
I am down on the Cardinals and the Cubs. The Cards are still a scary offense, with The Man Albert Pujols, Matt Holiday, Colby Rasmus, and Yadier Molina, and even though I am not in love with Lance Berkman playing the field, I have a sense he will hit well in St. Louis. But, I have never been in love with Ryan Franklin as a closer and even with Adam Wainwright and Chris Carpenter both battling for Cy Youngs, the Cards rotation is thin. And I just feel like the Pujols contract situation is going to hang over this entire team, all year.
As far as the Cubs, I just don't trust this team. You can make an argument that the offense is going to have a big year, with an energized Carlos Pena looking to prove his poorous 2010 average was an abberation and Tyler Colvin coming into his own. But I just feel like there are too many guys well on the back end of their careers, like Alfonso Soriano, the oft-injured Aramis Ramirez, and even Marlon Byrd. There are a lot of mid-30's guys with injury trends on this team that will ultimately determine the team's fate.
As far as the pitching staff, I like the addition of Matt Garza but have no idea how long Carlos Zambrano will remain on the team, or how effective he will be. Ryan Dempster is a good pitcher, but not an ace, and the Cubs are going to need an ace-quality guy. Again, on paper the Cubs aren't terrible. If their older players produce at a younger level, if Zambrano, Garza, and Dempster form a top-notch 1-2-3 in the rotation, and if the tandem of Kerry Wood and Carlos Marmol shut down the 8th and 9th, maybe the Cubbies surprise some people. I'm betting no.
I'm not going to spend a lot of time on the Astros and the Pirates. I am picking the Pirates simply because I think their "improvement" has to be measured in moving up from the bottom, rather than challenging for the top. Plus, I love Andrew McCutchen, Jose Tabata, and Pedro Alvarez making up a core of young, talented players the team might build on. But, that pitching is dreadful.
Houston is up for sale, meaning Carlos Lee is out as soon as an American League team determines it needs a DH. I actually like the top of their rotation, as Wandy Rodriguez is a top-quality pitcher, Brett Myers sort of reinvented himself, and J.A. Happ is a young lefty with the potential to pitch at the top of a rotation, in my opinion. Yet, that lineup is essentially Hunter Pence and a bunch of "who is that guy?" and the bullpen is completely unproven.

Best Player in the NL Central: Albert Pujols
Best Pitcher in the NL Central: Zach Greinke
Breakout Player in the NL Central: Ardolis Chapman
Comeback Player in the NL Central: Carlos Pena

Let's Begin Those Pesky Predictions With....the NL West

I can't wait. There's too much freakin snow on the ground. It's too damn cold. I'm too damn depressed that I'm so damn excited it's going to be 40 degrees this weekend. Forty-freakin-degrees and I feel like throwing on some shorts and going for a jog.

I would say that only those in the northern parts of the country know what I am talking about, but I am pretty sure winter decided to ruin the lives of every single American citizen this year. From Dallas to Bangor, Maine, you know what snow, sleet, ice, and freezing rain look and feel like. For most of us, the world still looks like an igloo.

So, while a season preview of baseball seems almost ludicrous on February 11, a few days from when pitchers and catchers are required to report, more than a month from the beginning of the baseball season, and probably two months from when the weather will actually be good, I don't....freakin.....care.

This isn't for you, it's for me. I need this. I am cold, from my gonads to my hair follicles, and I would all but guarantee that winter hasn't finished with us just yet. The 14 inches of ice on my lawn (down from 24 inches just a week or so ago) will have some additional covering before it is all said and done, and I won't see grass or dirt until sometime in June.

So, where to start? Usually, I decide to begin with the AL East because those are the teams I know the best. The Yankees are my team so the rosters of the Sox, Rays, Jays, and O's are pretty well known to me. But, this time around, I am going to start with someplace warm. I bet today, the weather is nice in San Diego, and I want to dream about gorgeous women in tight outfits getting a tan right now. That seems pleasant to me.

So, let's begin with the NL West. Lasy year, I predicted a Colorado Rockies victory. I also made the statement that the only team I couldn't see winning the division was the San Diego Padres. For the record, I picked the San Francisco Giants to finish third.

The point?

My predictions are, for the most part, as valuable as those made by the experts.

NL West

San Francisco Giants

LA Dodgers

Colorado Rockies

San Diego Padres

Arizona Diamondbacks

I am going to say, right off the bat, I don't love this pick. The Giants, to me, were the perfect case of a team getting on a magic carpet ride during a down baseball year. All the big horses were down. Even the Phillies never seemed to have “it” when it came time for the playoffs. The Giants had great pitching and timely hitting, and they won a bunch of one-run games. I have a hard time believing that will happen again.

So, why am I picking them? Here's why:

Tim Lincecum and Matt Cain are still on the team, and I love what Madison Bumgarner might bring after a little more big-league seasoning. Not much was done in terms of the offense, but the continued growth of Buster Posey and what has to be a better year from Pablo “Kung-Fu Panda” Sandoval will pay dividends, while I expect that Miguel Tejada will add a good, veteran bat to a team filled with good, but not great, hitters. Since no one in the NL West really improved all that much, I think Sandoval coming back to form could make up for some lost magic by the Bay.

In truth, however, I could see almost anyone winning this division. I like the Dodgers a lot, but I am slotting them in at third place primarily because there is such turmoil in the organization it is hard not to see that trickling down to the field. However, their lineup is solid, with Andre Ethier becoming a star, Matt Kemp looking for a breakout season, and Juan Uribe providing the double-whammy of helping the Dodgers and hurting the Giants. I also think a full year of Rafael Furcal will make a big difference.

I also like what they have done with their rotation, and they are now solid one through five with Clayton Kershaw at the top, Ted Lilly healthy and in the third spot, and Jon Garland adding a veteran presence and innings eater. If Chad Billingsley can find some consistency, they can be very good.

I like the Rockies as well but, for some reason, I feel a let down year coming. Is Ubaldo Jimenez going to be as good again in 2011 as he was in 2010? Is Carlos Gonzalez suddenly a perennial MVP candidate? Does Todd Helton have anything left in the gas tank?

Look, if the Rockies landed themselves a Michael Young to plug in at second or short, this team would be looking really good, but, again, I just don't quite buy them over the long haul. Of course, I say that almost every year, and almost every year the Rockies are sitting there battling for the division.

The team I think really falls off the map is the Padres.

We could get into the team's players, how Orlando Hudson will help at second base, how the team's young pitching might be able to duplicate what it did last year (I highly doubt it), and how Cameron Maybin is still only 23 and capable of being the impact star he was expected to be when he was in the minors. Truthfully, however, when the Padres decided to trade their best player to the Red Sox for non-MLB ready players, they should have sent their region's most famous anchorman out to make the announcement.

“I'm Ron Burgandy. Go F**k Yourself, San Diego.”

As for the Diamondbacks, as a Yankee fan I can tell you the following statement says everything you need to know about the team: the starting left fielder is scheduled to be Xavier Nady, the starting first baseman is slotted to be Juan Miranda, and the number one starter is rumored to be Ian Kennedy. If you're a Yankee fan, you know how bad things are in Arizona.

Best Player in the NL West: Justin Upton

Best Pitcher in the NL West: Matt Cain

Breakout Player in the NL West: Madison Bumgarner

Comeback Player in the NL West: Pablo Sandoval

Is Liriano The Solution?

So, you might have heard that the Yankees are a little thin when it comes to the starting rotation? Well, only if you think the upcoming spring training battle royale for the fourth and fifth starter spots between Ivan Nova, Freddy Garcia, Bartolo Colon, the re-animated corpse of Mark Prior, Sergio Mitre, and any slightly inebriated bleacher creature who happens to show up early for a game in Tampa, won't result in World Series-caliber hurling. Ah, only a few days until pitchers and catchers. Catch the fever.

For two months, ever since Cliff Lee gave a big ol'Philidelphia-style middle finger to the Bronx, Yankee General Manager Brian Cashman has preached patience. There wasn't anything of great value out there to be had so sit back, relax, and see if anything crazy happened, like Felix Hernandez demanding to be traded only to the Yankees for Ramiro Pena and Francisco Cervelli.

But, nothing crazy did happen. No front-line starters materialized out of thin air and landed in Cashman's lap. As he collected scrap heap arms, like Garcia and Colon, the last best hope for a solid top-to-bottom rotation disappeared when Andy Pettitte decided the comforts of Houston were too much of a Siren song to ignore, and retired.

Cashman and the Yankees have said all the right things, but everyone involved has admitted that the rotation is weak. The problem isn't just with the backend. The problem is that, after CC Sabathia, there are a lot of “I don't knows” in the pitching staff.

Is Phil Hughes the 1.68 ERA fireballer he appeared to be out of the gate last season, or the over-5 ERA guy he was to the middle-end of the year? I don't know.

Can AJ Burnett ever harness his talent for even one season and put together a consistently brilliant campaign? Can he at least return to his heady 13-9, 4.07 ERA 2009 season form, or will he continue to sink under the weight of his own consistency? I don't know.

Will the Yankees ever allow one of their prized pitching prospects — Manny Banuleos, Andrew Brackman, and Dellin Betances — to take a stab at the rotation or will they keep them in the minors at all costs? Again, no clue.

When four-fifths of your rotation elicites a shoulder shrug anytime someone asks for a performance prediction, October seems like a long way off.

Sure, the lineup should be fine, with bounceback seasons possible for A-Rod, Mark Teixeira, Derek Jeter, Jorge Posada, and Curtis Granderson, and the addition of Rafeal Soriano to an already formidable bullpen should shorten a lot of these games, but a team's success and failure usually rests on the arms of its starters, and that's where the least amount of certainty lies.

Enter the Minnesota Twins.

See, it was reported this week by the Minnesota Times-Tribune that the Twins are more than willing to part ways with lefty starter Francisco Liriano. The 26-year old starter will be a free agent after the 2012 season and, coming off a year when he posted 191 innings, 201 strikeouts, and a 3.62 ERA, the Twins, according to the article, feel like now would be the best time to deal their star pitcher.

The question is, would the Yankees jump into the fray?

Here are the positives:

*Liriano is a lefty with strikeout stuff, which has become even more valuable considering all the lefties Boston has asquired the last year.

*Liriano is still young, only 27-years old.

*Liriano pitched well against both the Yankees and Red Sox last year, though he was bombed in two starts at Fenway Park.

*Liriano still appears to be learning and, at 27, his best years may well be in front of him.

Here are the negatives:

*Liriano is still an injury risk, having suffered from arm problems in the minors, then requiring Tommy John Surgery after the 2007 season, forcing him to miss the entire 2008 campaign.

*Liriano has not been impressive in his postseason appearances.

*Liriano is looking for a multi-year extension, with the rumor being that he asked the Twins for a three year, $39 million contract ($13 million per year).

*The Twins believe Liriano is at the height of his value, so they would probably demand a lot in return.

That last “negative” is, to me, the most interesting. I'm not that concerned about Liriano's injury concerns. Several pitchers have had Tommy John Surgery, many early in their careers, and they haven't missed a beat. Liriano seemed to follow the progress of most pitchers off Tommy John: struggle through the first year back, excell in that second year. Plus, the Twins claim to be concerned about Liriano's health, yet just re-upped with Carl Pavano, who should have a shrine erected to him in the Injured Players Hall of Fame.

I'm also not that concerned about any extension for Liriano. First, he will only make $4.3 million this year and probably not a tremendous amount more than that in 2012. After that, he can become a free agent. If the Yanks bring him in and the lefty pitches well, they will be happy to pay him. If he pitches poorly, they can let him walk. If he pitches only so-so, then the Yanks could decide to bring him back, but have much more room to maneuveur away from a three year contract worth $13 million per.

No, to me the major question is not finances or injury concerns, it's prospect cost. What would the Twins want?

The strange thing is, the Twins are one of the more unique cases in all of baseball, as they don't need what the Yankees have in abundance. Almost every team with a player to trade will run to the Yankees because they have three top-quality catching prospects, a truly rare commodity in baseball. Jesus Montero is thought to be the top hitting prospect in the entire minor leagues, Austin Romine has been touted as a pure combination of hitting ability and defensive acumen, and some believe that Gary Sanchez, who hasn't played above A ball yet, might be the best of all of them.

Yet, the Twins have themselves the top catcher in major league baseball: Joe Mauer. He's young, durable, and getting a lot of money over a lot of years. If there is one team that doesn't need a catcher, it's Mauer.

That might not matter in the case of Montero. Many believe he is destined for another position, anyway. His size and somewhat shaky defensive skills have had many wondering whether anything from firstbase to DH is in his future.

Maybe the Twins take Montero, move him to DH or the outfield, and hope his bat translates the way so many believe. The question is, would the Yankees be willing, or be wise, to give up Montero?

I have a hard time believing that, as good as Liriano is, he is worth Montero. I wasn't willing to give up on Montero for Cliff Lee, let alone Liriano. With the question marks that surround him, I would be willing to give up a couple of A- guys, not A+ guys.

How about Andrew Brackman, Joba Chamberlain, and Eduardo Nunez? Brackman is a top pitching prospect, Chamberlain has a load of talent and could be a closer or a starter, and Nunez appears to be a solid option at short stop, a spot that is somewhat weak on the Twins right now. Would that do the job?

Considering that Liriano is not a sure thing, I think that is a somewhat fair deal. Chamberlain and Nunez are major league-ready right now. Brackman is another strong-armed lefty who could be up and ready to pitch at the major-league level by the end of the year.

The question is, what kind of premium would the Twins put on selling to the Yankees because, you know, they are the Yankees?

Even if the Yanks had the best offer on the table, would the Twins bite? Would they want to help strengthen a team they could conceivably face in the playoffs, a team that has handled them with ease in the past?

It might be that the Twins would demand Montero as a part of the deal to even consider the trade. The thinking might be that, if the Twins got a bat as potent as Montero then trading a potential top-of-the-rotation guy to a league rival would be palatable. Without that overpay, the Twins might be inclined to take a lesser deal from a less formidable foe, or ship him off to an NL team looking to improve their rotation (the Mets would be a prime candidate, except for the fact that they have nothing to give in a trade).

I think the Yankees would and should jump all over Liriano, if he becomes available. How much better does a rotation of Sabathia, Liriano, Hughes, Burnett, and Nova look? It takes pressure off everyone: Sabathia doesn't have to be perfect, Hughes doesn't have to be a top performer, Nova can progress naturally in the last spot in the rotation, and if Burnett comes back to form, wonderful, if not, it doesn't devastate your rotation. Also, that has a lot of potential for the future. Sabathia is 30, Liriano 27, Hughes 24, Nova 24. If Liriano stays healthy, Hughes and Nova progress, and the Yankees hit on one of their top pitching prospects, Burnett can essentially become an afterthought. In two years, you could have a rotation of Sabathia, Hughes, Liriano, Nova, and Manny Banuleos. Would you sign up for three hard throwing lefties in your rotation right now, with three of your pitchers being homegrown? I would.

I don't know how realistic this whole thing is. The Twins may decide to hang on to Liriano through the season and explore a trade next year. They may may deal him at the trade deadline, and they may decide that, under no circumstances is Liriano finding himself onto the dreaded Yankee roster.

They may also decide to ship Liriano as a part of a deal that lands them Michael Young, the star infielder for the Rangers who wants nothing to do with DH'ing and has asked for a trade. The Rangers, like the Yankees, are looking for a top starter after losing out on Lee and while Liriano doesn't provide the guarantee Lee did, he is a very nice second option. With Young in the lineup, joining Denard Span, Justin Morneau, Joe Mauer, and Michael Cuddyer, the Twins would suddenly have a formidable lineup to go along with an always solid rotation. It might be their best choice.

Yet, despite any challenges, Liriano's availability is the first piece of interesting news to arrive at the Yankee doorstep. There would be a reason to get excited in the Bronx. There would be a reason to imagine the Yankees going toe-to-toe with the much improved Red Sox.

Real GM's don't have to wait for sure things to fall into their laps. They make their money not by simply throwing the owner's money around, but by finding a way to pry pitchers like Liriano away from their clubs without burning down the minor leagues.

The most notably thing Cashman has done this entire offseason is dress like an elf and scale down the side of a large building. Perhaps, if he pulls off a Liriano deal, he can retain what is left of his dignity and his credibility.

Goodbye Andy Pettitte!!!

There has never been a player in my lifetime that proved the “know what you have until it's gone” mantra better than Andy Pettitte. See, for years, I was a lot like former owner George Steinbrenner, who never seemed all that enraptured by Pettitte. He was good, of course, but he wasn't “great,” and New York is about “great.” Pettitte was always somewhat of an afterthought. There was David Cone and David Wells pitching perfect games and coming up big in big games. There was the arrival of Roger Clemens, argueably one of the top five pitchers in the history of the game (until the whole steroids era was flushed out). There was El Duque, Orlando Hernandez, with his quirky delivery, his slow-motion breaking ball, and his ability to fool the best hitters in the biggest games.

Through it all was Andy, in the background, taking the mound every fifth day, getting hitters out.

Andy didn't strike a lot of guys out. He didn't pitch two-hitters. He didn't finish the season with eye-popping results. He just won.

Unfortunately, on a team that “just won,” his consistency seemed boring. There was no flash there, no pomp and circumstance that surrounded his game. He was just there, doing his job, and doing it at a very good clip.

Of course there was the Game 5 in the 1996 World Series, the duel with John Smoltz where Pettitte blanked the Braves to send the Yankees home with an improbable three games to two lead in a series where they had dropped the first two contests at home. It was his signature moment. In fact, it remains his signature moment. But, it wasn't enough to outshine all the stars and personalities that surrounded him.

After the 2003 season, the Yankees let Pettitte go. The details are sketchy. The Yankees and Brian Cashman insist that Andy wanted to return home to Houston and play closer to his family. Pettitte has made it clear he never felt wanted by the Yankees and didn't return because no offer was ever made. The Yankees state they made an offer. Who knows the truth. All we do know is that the Yankees, and George Steinbrenner, had the same view of Pettitte as I did: good but not good enough to break the bank over. If he left, no big deal.

Now, I didn't want Pettitte to go. I didn't understand why the Yankees weren't willing to offer one of their own a contract. But, if I am being honest, I wasn't devastated. This wasn't Derek Jeter or Mariano Rivera. This wasn't an iconic Yankee. This wasn't someone who was irreplaceable. I would have liked to have had Pettitte back, but life goes on.

Besides, the Yankees, before the 2004 season, made a bunch of splashy moves that had all Yankee fans, like me, admiring the shiny new toys in the Steinbrenner collection.

There was Kevin Brown, the veteran righty who broke bats with his devastating sinker. There was Javier Vazquez, one of the bright young pitching stars in the game, who had wallowed in obscurity in Montreal long enough. Then, of course, there was Alex Rodriguez, the $260 million man, considered the best player in the game at that time, who was coming over to play third base for the Bombers because no one was moving Jeter from his perch at short stop.

Pettitte was gone but, let's face it, who was gonna miss him?

If you're a Yankee fan, or (gulp) a Red Sox fan, you know what happened in 2004. The Yankees murdered the Red Sox in three straight games in the ALCS. Then, performed one of the most infamous choke jobs in the history of the sport, losing four straight, including a disasterous game 7 where the new and shiny Yankee toys, Kevin Brown, Javier Vazquez, and Alex Rodriguez, all helped in the collossal failure.

It was one of the most heartbreaking loses and Yankee history, one to this day I have a hard time believing happened, but it did, and when the final out was recorded, and the Sox celebrated their ALCS victory on the mound at Yankee Stadium, the first thing I thought was “this wouldn't have happened if Andy Pettitte were here.”

He returned in 2007 and played in Pinstripes four more years, winning another World Series, and never, not once, having to deal with a fanbase ungrateful for his efforts. We had seen life without Andy Pettitte. We had seen what a series, what a season, could look like without someone with grit, guts, a will to win, and an ability to just go out there and “get the job done.” What had seemed boring in his first go-around with the Yankees was suddenly an exilar for all that ailed a group that looked more like a fantasy team than a championship squad.

Between 1996 and 2003 I must have seen Pettitte pitch 20 times. It was just the way the schedule would work out. When my buddies and I would pick a game to attend, driving down from Connecticut for the day, it always seemed to fall on the day Pettitte was scheduled to take the mound. It became a running joke for our group.

“Who's pitching?” one would ask.

“I don't know, but good money is on Pettitte,” the other would respond.

“God, anyone but Pettitte.”

That's the way we felt.

Now, in 2011, I treasure having seen him as much as I did and wish, fervently, I had a few more opportunities before now.

Pettitte is officially retired. He is leaving the game the way most great players should, on his own terms and still in demand. At 38, the Yankees wanted him back. More than that, they needed him back. But Pettitte felt the pull of family more keenly now than he ever did before, and he decided to call it quits. Good for him.

Conversation has already begun about the Yankees' shaky rotation going into 2011 and columnists have already bantered around about Pettitte's Hall of Fame credentials. Those debates should be saved for another day. What this does to the Yankees now, and what chances Pettitte has of going to Cooperstown in five years, has no bearing on the days events.

Today, Yankee fans everywhere should simply say “thank you.” Pettitte conducted his life, and his career, with class. Even his poor decision to use steroids to help heal from an injury was handled with dignity and honesty, and true remorse, even though Pettitte was never accused of using the drug to enhance his own performance or change his body, the way so many of his contemporaries had done.

Pettitte was a big-game pitcher in a city that demands big-time performances. He was a top-flight pitcher and person.

For a Louisiana boy who called Texas home, Pettitte will forever be viewed as a New Yorker. He won over a city that is used to bright lights and big personalities with quiet consistency and grace. And he won, period.

So, from a very grateful Yankee fan, who never realized how important Pettitte was until he was gone, I say “thank you” and good luck in your retirement.