Arms Race

It needs to be said: Brian Cashman is really good at his job. A little more than week after the Red Sox inked John Lackey, Cashman went out and landed Javier Vazquez in exchange for Melky Cabrera, hard-throwing lefty reliever Mike Dunn and the highly regarded pitching prospect Arodys Vizcaino. Hardly a king’s ransom, although not exactly the broad-day mugging some pundits claim. You’ll probably disagree, but I think the trade is a pretty equitable exchange of talent, with the Yankees benefiting more in the immediate future than the Braves, who will likely reap their rewards a few years down the line. A case could be even made that the Braves got a better package of prospects for Vazquez than the Phillies got in return for Cliff Lee. That’s obviously debatable, and I’m not exactly prepared to argue either way. Prospects are prospects, after all.

Still, this was a move Cashman was right to make. A few nitwits are in a panic over Vazquez’s second tour of duty with the Yankees, probably because of this. That’s just silly. Granted, Vazquez was pretty awful after the All-Star Game and downright horrendous in the playoffs, but he was reportedly pitching with a strained shoulder, and has shown more than enough talent throughout his career to be dismissed on such a small, albeit ugly, sample size. Vazquez has pitched at least 200 innings in nine of the last 10 seasons. (He pitched 198 innings in 2004). At the same time, he racked up 1,027 strikeouts. 1,000 innings, 1,000 strike outs. The only other pitcher to match this output is Mets ace Johan Santana. What’s more, Vazquez was sixth last season in the National League with a 2.87 ERA, a career best. Now, this number is sure to jump up at least a run in the American League, but his low ERA and high strike out rate isn’t why Cashman went out and got him.

"We’re bringing Javy Vazquez to pitch toward the back end of our rotation," Cashman said. “We’re not here to say he’s going to win 20 games and lead us.”

With Vazquez back in the fold, the Yankees' starting rotation, fresh off an impressive postseason run, becomes all the more formidable, arguably the best in the Majors. His addition also gives the Yankees the opportunity to decide, maybe once and for all, the final landing spot for Joba Chamberlain and Phil Hughes. One or the other will now most likely spend the season as Rivera's set-up man, which will go a long way in shoring up the bullpen, especially if Damaso Marte and David Robertson can repeat their postseason performances during the regular season.

Make no mistake. Cashman made this move in direct response to the Lackey signing. He knew the Sox had gained a pretty significant edge in starting pitching, and recognized the need to strike back. That he was able to do so without sacrificing the team's immediate pool of talent is impressive. What can I say, the man is really good at his job.

BEN:

Well, I agree, and I don't. No question this was a move that improves the Yankees in the near-term without making any definite long-term sacrifices. From what I understand, Vizcaino was the key to the deal for the Braves, and if he turns into a career ace, and Vazquez is bad, or doesn't last long, this deal could end up looking quite different in hindsight. That scenario isn't all that likely, though. I agree that Vazquez is a durable pitcher with excellent stuff, even if he's been criticized as a "national league pitcher," or someone who doesn't possess a killer instinct. The latter criticism seems more valid to me than the former, but for a #3/#4 starter, these are pretty small points of worry. One thing I haven't heard said about this move is the wonders it may do for the bullpen, not only because Chamberlain is better suited as a full-time reliever but also because a 200-inning #4 starter takes a tremendous burden off of the relief corp over the length of the season. I wouldn't be at all surprised if guys like Aceves and Melancon had markedly better years as a result of the reduced workload.

As for how much of a genius Cashman is, well, I'm not going to say he's average. But this trade is a salary dump, something you see less of in the offseason (and some curious management of assets by the Braves, who subsequently spent some of their money on the injured and aging Troy Glaus.) But I'd argue that if this same trade were made at the deadline, it would look less ingenious on Cashman's part. He has the advantage of being able to replace guys like Melky Cabrera and Mike Dunn without really ever working at it--he can just go sign Damaso Marte or Xavier Nady/Nick Swisher at any moment.

(This isn't to say the Sox can't do the same thing 75% of the time; just to point out that the way in which an organization the size of the Yankees manages assets like Cabrera and Dunn is very different from that of most teams, and it leverages them not only in free-agent signings like last year's, but also in trading situations and in the draft.)

But there's one hidden piece of leverage here: only the Yankees can afford to pay Vazquez. The Braves, who were reportedly trying to shed salary in the form of Derek Lowe, could find no takers. And so when they went to move the $11.5m Vazquez, who was there left to deal with? The Sox reportedly have only a few million dollars left to spend; the Angels have already let several major free agents go; the Mets and Cardinals appear tied up with Bay and Holliday, respectively; and the Cubs have already traded Milton Bradley to shed costs. Maybe some other dark-horse club could've stepped up--the Tigers, the Astros, the Dodgers--but I suspect most teams are trying to get smaller, save the ones who feel they can win next year. So, where does that leave the Braves, who were so desperate to be rid of the cost? They had to compromise with the Yankees. And lo, here is your 200-inning 4th starter.

Not a bad bit of negotiating by Cashman--I'm not knocking him. But perhaps not all about sleight of hand and preternatural savvy, either.

MILES:

All valid points. Still, Cashman did unload Melky's $4-million salary, which means the addition of Vazquez only adds $8 million to the payroll. I understand that this is not an insignificant number. I honestly do. But there are teams that could carry this, most notably the ones you mentioned above. Whether they want to, is another issue.

Look, I know Cashman has some seriously deep pockets, which affords him an unquestionable advantage in building and maintaining a team. But this alone doesn't guarantee anything. The Mets and, to a lesser extent, the Cubs and Tigers are good examples of how a high payroll doesn't necessarily translate into successful seasons. More often than not, particularly in recent years, Cashman's used his resources judiciously, refusing, for instance, to give up Melky, Ian Kennedy and Phil Hughes for Johan Santana in 2007. Instead, he waited until the end of the 2008 season to sign Sabathia, and, a year later, swap Kennedy et al. for Curtis Granderson, and Melky (and Vizcaino and Dunn) for Vazquez. You might not agree, but I think this is where Cashman demonstrates an acumen more sophisticated than a series of blank checks. He usually reads the market correctly, and is more than willing to give up talent (and take on salary), as long as the price is right, so to speak. Which is a lot more than I can say for the other teams mentioned above.

That said, I still believe Theo is as good, if not better, than Cashman in putting together a team. Six or one-half dozen the other, really. I mean, it's no accident the Yankees and the Red Sox are usually battling it out for the AL East, and are annually among the top teams in the Majors. As a baseball fan, I can't wait for the upcoming 2010 season, which promises to be a really good one, due in no small part to Theo's work this offseason and Cashman's quick move in response.

Also, as an aside, I shouldn't discount the work Jack Zduriencik has done rebuilding the Mariners, adding talent, pitching depth and salary to his team. A man after my own heart, it seems.

BEN:

Jack Zduriencik has game.