Mo’s piece yesterday on Brian Cashman ties in nicely with some thoughts I’ve had on his moves over the course of the off season. So I wanted to do a follow-up piece to build on the points he’s raised.
The most common criticism of Brian is that any monkey can do his job, because he has so much money to work with. While no one can claim that he doesn’t have enormous resources to work with, it’s not fair to say that that he doesn’t add anything but his ability to write checks. We’ve all seen teams spend loads of money and perform badly (98 Orioles, 09 Mets) So while it’s a nice thing to have, it doesn’t guarantee you anything. Bad management can squander the advantages that money gives you. George Stienbrenner outspent every team in Baseball from 1982-1990 and didn’t have a single playoff berth to show for it.
Think about what Brian has managed to do so far this off season. He has reduced payroll AND got younger in key areas at the same time. The two players he traded for (Vasquez/Granderson) were players the other GM would have preferred to keep. A lesser GM (or George Steinbrenner in his heyday) might have taken the bait on one of the salary dumps, figuring the low cost in talent would make trading for a Magglio Ordonez or Derek Lowe worth the risk. But Brian used the disadvantaged position the other GM was in to pry away one of his core players, ones that could have helped that team win in 2010. Plus, thanks to Brian’s efforts in rebuilding the farm system, he had the prospects to make those deals. That wasn’t the case in previous years. Not only did we have the prospects, but none of the players who were traded created a significant hole on the 2010 Yanks. In each deal, he traded from a position of strength.
His ability to assess the ever-changing marketplace in a down economy has been outstanding. We all gasped when he didn’t offer salary arbitration to Bobby Abreu and Ivan Rodriguez last year, and squirmed a bit when he declined to offer again with Hideki Matsui and Johnny Damon this year. Fans moaned about the loss of draft picks and wondered what on Earth he was thinking. Yet looking at what those players ultimately signed for and Johnny Damon’s dwindling list of suitors, he was right and we were wrong. Each of them would have done far better in salary arbitration, and Brian replaced all of them with cheaper and younger options.
He’s also been creative with his deals. In the Brian Bruney deal, he utilized a little-known loophole in the Rule 5 Draft and managed to secure a good fit for the 2010 team in Jaime Hoffman. By offering Bruney to the Nats who had the #1 overall pick, he had a large pool of players to choose from and most likely did better than he would have had he done a straight up trade for Bruney, whose value was fairly low.
I’ve always felt Brian is the ideal Yankee GM. He balances the new with the old in utilizing statistical analysis as well as scouts. He’s never secure in his job or his moves, and is therefore always looking to make the team better. He’s also a very honest, unassuming guy and is therefore very disarming. That’s key, because it changes the equation when dealing with the ‘big bad Yankees’. One of the most oft-repeated claims by Agents, Sportswriters and other GMs is that the Yankees can afford anything, and should therefore be expected to contribute more financially in making trades. Brian doesn’t do that. He insists on paying market value for Free agents and in trades. They rarely if ever set new highs in terms of annual average value (per year) for free agent signings. He even went so far to have the small market Pirates and Padres kick in money on trades in recent years. A Yankee GM with a more aggressive personality would never get away with that. Yet Brian does, to the benefit of the franchise. Brian is our Patrick Ewing, you can complain all you want about him, but you’ll miss him when he’s gone.
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
19 Responses to Thinking about Brian Cashman-Part 2
Leave a Reply
TIQ IQ
I truly couldn’t have said it any better.
I think the key point is how the farm system has been repaired. As recently as 2005 or 2006, the common thread in all trade talks was how the Yanks farm system was barren and they didn’t have the pieces needed to swing a trade. The same can no longer be said, as we saw in trades for Granderson and Vazquez over the past few weeks.
The Yanks may never become the player development machine that the Red Sox have been since 2002 (to their tremendous credit (and my envy)) but the truth of the matter is that the Yanks don’t have to go that route. As long as the system produces a few high ceiling players each year and a few other solid players each year, the Yanks will have their pick of the litter from which to trade in order to keep the 25-man roster as stocked as we demanding Yankee fans expect.
“Yet looking at what those players ultimately signed for and Johnny Damon’s dwindling list of suitors, he was right and we were wrong. Each of them would have done far better in salary arbitration, and Brian replaced all of them with cheaper and younger options.”
This is like Mondesi-bait. We don’t know Cashman made the right calls because of what these guys ultimately signed/will sign for or because they would have done better, for 2010, in salary arbitration. We’d only know he made the right calls if we knew those players in question would have accepted arbitration had it been offered, and we certainly don’t know that regarding Damon. If you believe, as I do, that Damon would have declined arbitration if it had been offered by the Yankees, then you think Cashman made the wrong call because if he’d offered arbitration to Damon he would have gained 2 very high draft picks in the 2010 draft. He could have, if he had offered arbitration to Damon, replaced Damon with a cheaper and younger option, no differently than he did in reality, AND had 2 extra draft picks to play with.
(PS: Kudos on grabbing Imbrogno, he’s a nice addition to the site.)
Fair point on Damon, but Matsui, I-Rod and Bobby would have clearly earned more than what they signed for. We’ll have to wait and see what Johnny actually gets this off season to see if Cash was right on him as well. If Johnny winds up with 2 years 12 mil, then Cash made the right call there as well.
BTW-Agree on Matty, long time fan of his posts and comments.
I don’t disagree on Matsui, I-Rod or Abreu (although I think Abreu is certainly arguable), but the reason is not that they would have earned more in arbitration than what they signed for, it’s that they probably would have accepted arbitration. Matsui, for example, seemed like someone who would have taken a 1-year deal to stay in the Bronx, for many reasons (comfortability with the Yankees, desire to stay, what we know of his contract demands)… Reasons which were actually validated when he quickly signed a 1-year deal in Anaheim. Damon, on the other hand, did not seem like someone who would have taken a 1-year deal on December 7th, for many reasons (his own contract history, his being a Boras guy, his coming off a career year and looking for one more multi-year deal, etc.). If Damon winds up signing a 2009 Abreu deal somewhere that still won’t validate Cashman’s decision to not offer him arbitration, all that matters is that Damon would have turned down the arbitration offer on December 7th and the Yankees would be in the same exact position they’re in today, except they’d also have 2 extra draft picks.
Again… Cashman won’t have made the right call if Damon winds up with 2 years/$12M, what Damon winds up with has nothing to do with the determination of whether Cashman made the right call. The determination of whether or not Cashman made the right call is solely contingent on whether Damon would have accepted arbitration on December 7th, not on what he eventually signs for.
But if Damon gets 12 mil for ONE year in arb (reasonable assumption) and 12 for 2 on the open market, then Cashman’s assessment of the marketplace was more accurate than Damon’s. I’m sure Brian made this clear to Boras in discussing Damon. You can’t expect players and agents to behave irrationally, though agents and GMs often do. Your scenario puts faith in the idea that Boras would have advised Damon to decline, even in a down market. He may, but in doing so he would have done his client a disservice. Again, if I’m Brian I cant expect players and agents to act against their own interests. Still the right call IMO.
I don’t think there is any way Damon goes down to 12 million off the year he had. Likely at least 15 million.
That’s fine, and you may very well be right. We can quibble about the numbers but the point(s) HCM and I made would be largely unaffected.
I completely agree with your larger point. Cashman is a very good GM and the Yanks have made the right choices since he got the control he sought.
I am not a fan. He is average in my view. Why should we be satisfied being far behind the Redsox in player development.
This is a myth of the Red Sox hype machine.
Who cares how far behind the Yanks are in player development? In an ideal world, the Yanks would be perfectly efficient in their operations, draft only great players that always pan out and still have the $200M payroll to have the best players on the planet.
The truth is, the Yanks farm system is good enough that they’ve got the #5 prospect in the game (Montero) only three seasons after having the #4 prospect in the game (Hughes) and two seasons after having the #3 prospect in the game (Chamberlain). Clearly, the system has improved dramatically in a very short period of time and the Yanks only need the system to be so good. That Boston’s might be better has not impeded the Yankees franchise in any way.
He’s not our Patrick Ewing. He’s won championships.
Touche, well played.
Sorry but as Patrick’s biggest fan, I take exception to the implication that the Knicks never won because of him. John Starks and Charles Oakley. Those were the only two players that ever made a single All-Star team (both in 1994) during Patrick’s prime. Show me another player that won a title without so much as one other multi-All Star.
Should the Knicks have won in 1994? Yeah, they probably should’ve. But that’s just as much Pat Riley’s fault for letting Ro Blackman sit there collecting dust in the decisive Game 7…
I was joking. I’m a big Knicks fan and a huge Ewing fan. He surely wasn’t to blame for the fact that he didn’t play with any other very good offensive player. Of course, if the ref called the foul on Charles Smith…
Good to hear. I always took it personally that so many Knicks fans took Patrick for granted. My interest in the team and the NBA hasn’t been the same ever since The Big Fella was traded to Seattle.
I loved him a little too much, probably.
I’d say Cashman;s career has ranged between gross incompetence and routine solid GM activity.He’s no genius and has only recently begun to figure it out, though this year I believe he’s gone back to being mediocre again after making the obvious though correct moves last season which was clearly his best as a GM.
I only hope we see continued improvement and if he’s behind the recent strengthening of the minor league system he deserves some credit there yoo but I doubt he is.Last year’s draft was very good also, especially if they sign the Cuban kid, who I believe was the cause of them letting all those lefty throwers they drafted but didn’t sign go back to college.
Cashman is the right guy for the Yankees, in my humble opinion! He has worked through the bad days of the Boss, the rule of the Yankee people in Tampa and Joe T.
Cash has learned to subjugate his ego for the betterment of the team. He has surrounded himself with knowledgeable people to help with evaluation of trades etc. Also, it takes time to turn around the farm system…he is working on that.
Theo would have quit the Yankees long ago, his ego would have gotten in his way.
There have been a few deals pulled off that I disagreed with at the time, some I agreed with. In MOST cases he has been right, in a few he was wrong but, that can be said of any GM in the sports world.
Shame on you low-expectation….low-self-esteem losers out there for backing Brian “Brain-Dead” Cashman.
This young punk was NEVER qualified to be our GM. He is of average I.Q. at best. His only distinguishing feature, that the shrewd onlooker can discern is that he’s been a good boy/loyal lapdog to the powers that be. He is good at not “rocking the boat.”
The only way one can legitimately evaluate him is to compare him….to the second team in baseball….The RedSox.
The RedSox obviously, lucked out with Theo Epstein. More than any other person, this smart Jewish dude (what else?) overcame the marvelous “Curse of the Bambino”. That’s a major accomplishment. The RedSox certainly don’t deserve Theo.
The biggest Cashman loss…..Theo win in the past decade was the David Ortiz travesty. Cashman advised AGAINST signing David Ortiz (other than Manny, the most fearsome hitter for about 5 years in the AL). To his credit, George Steinbrenner wanted Ortiz…but, Cashman overruled.
Ortiz did major damage to us….all of it unnecessary. Brian “Brain-Dead” Cashman goes down, therefore just ahead of Mike Burke of CBS as the WORST Yankee’s GM in history.
A Chimpanzee with Cashman’s budget could most likely have equaled Brian in effectiveness. I also think that many Yankee fans – (with college degrees) could EASILY out distance Cash in acumen and winning percentage.
There simply is NO EVIDENCE whatsoever to prove that Cashman is anything better than mediocre. And, my friends, that is simply not acceptable when you are talking about the single greatest sports organization in human history.
The Yankees have won….in no small way….in spite of this fool.