Brian Cashman needs to admit his one big mistake
The Yankees weren't ready to go out and find a new GM. Cashman wasn't ready to leave. So I guess it's the best thing for both sides that he's back. But I never thought the Yankees would fall apart without him. In three years, Hal Steinbrenner might feel confident enough to let Cashman go if things don't work out. The year-long drama was really not necessary.
First thing first: Cashman is a good guy. Unlike some other team executives in this town (see post below), he really is a good man, and treats people well, and he's not a mean-spirited jock-sniffing yahoo. He's a rarity. Any disagreements with him over personnel are not personal, just professional.
I understand he had quite the fiesty press conference yesterday. The only problem I have is he continues to defend not trading for Santana when he had the chance. Here's the statement he needs to make on that:
"Not trading for Santana was a mistake. I overvalued my pitching prospects and undervalued our need for a true No. 1 pitcher. Plus, I had no idea Santana was the kind of man he obviously was down the stretch with the Mets, pitching a shutout on three days rest with a torn meniscus and all. I lumped a 29-year-old ace together with the Jeff Weavers and Kevin Browns and Randy Johnsons of the past that I had been burned on. If I had it to do all over again, at the end of the day, of course I would trade for Santana. If, in year 5 or 6, he breaks down, but I have a World Series or two to show for it, that's a good deal. Heck, for '09 my big three would be Santana, Joba and Wang, and with the other young arms I have, plus Mo in the bullpen, that's pretty good. It was a mistake."
Seriously, Brian. We all make mistakes. It's OK. Own up to this one. It'll make you a better executive in the future.
E-mail
Facebook
Digg
Delicious
Comments (6)
Guess I'm one of the few that still agrees with Cashman. On a one year basis, sure, he should have traded for Santana. But this was never a one year deal. No matter what anyone says, 2007 was always going to be a transition year. But as the final numbers depict, pitching was not the problem. Offense was.
Runs scored
2007 - 968
2008 - 789
Diff: -179
Runs against
2007 - 777
2008 - 727
Diff - +60
The Melky/Cano/Molina factor impacted the Yankees far more than the Hughes/Kennedy issues. Besides, Hughes is still only 22 years old. Not everyone can be Tim Lincecum right out of the gate. Hughes still has tremendous value around MLB.
Coming into last off-season, Cashman knew he'd be looking at a number of FA starting pitchers for the 2009 season. He didn't need to trade the farm for Santana.
Typo: "...2008 was going to be a transition year..."
Again, and I repeat, on their best days, neither Ian Kennedy, who I don't think will become a reliable ML pitcher, nor Phil Hughes, who I think will be pretty good to very good, will NEVER be close to Johan Santana.
For that reason alone, it was a no-brainer trade. Said it last winter, I would've dealt them both plus Melky plus another prospect for Johan.
GO RIEBER !!
Rieber, first off imagine the backlash if he makes that statement. The media would be all over him for bashing Hughes and Kennedy. Plus what would it do to their trade value? Even if he feels what you're saying is true, it would make no sense to publicly say it.
Plus, you got to give the guy credit. He knew the Yanks would be better with Santana...but he had the stones to NOT make that trade. Had he made the trade, he would have went into his "walk" year with a much better record and a possible playoff birth. It was really selfless to operate the way he did.
He believed in his vision and I hope he still does.
But I do agree with you Anthony that its ok for a GM to admit a mistake here and there. Just not in this case.
I agree with Keith and Richie G.