PDA

View Full Version : Randy Johnson a Yankee



Evil Dr. Len
12-31-2004, 06:09 AM
The Yankees and Diamondbacks have agreed in principle on a three-for-one swap that will send 41-year-old Randy Johnson to the Bronx, sources close to the trade said Thursday. But Arizona's top official said the club was still working on details and that paperwork couldn't be forwarded to the Commissioner's office until after the New Year's weekend.

The Diamondbacks would get pitchers Javier Vazquez and Brad Halsey, along with catcher Dioner Navarro and $8.5 million to $9 million in cash, in exchange for Johnson, the five-time Cy Young winner who has been coveted by the Yankees for since this past July's non-waiver trade deadline.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

The Yanks knew they needed pitching help and yes RJ seems the easiest solution but at the age of 41??? I guess it's always about today with the Yanks otherwise you'd think they'd invest in much younger talent like Millwood and Milton.

Angelus
12-31-2004, 12:10 PM
Millwood and Milton won't put up the kind of numbers Johnson will.

This is how the Yanks do it. They'll use Johnson for a couple years then sign or trade for the next aging vet who can dominate for a couple years.

Esks4ever
12-31-2004, 04:50 PM
Its now said the Yankee's Payroll for the next season will be 205 Million dollars... the luxury tax they will pay will be 600.000 dollars more than the entire Tampa Bay Payroll.

earl2
01-01-2005, 01:53 PM
Blah, blah, blah... Yankees acquire another superstar for a billion dollars...blah, blah, blah...
Man, I'm getting tired of MLB...

Esks4ever
01-01-2005, 02:22 PM
Blah, blah, blah... Yankees acquire another superstar for a billion dollars...blah, blah, blah...
Man, I'm getting tired of MLB...


almost sounds like what Eskimo haters say about us :)

Joepritch2
01-02-2005, 12:49 PM
The best part about it all is that the Yankees haven't won a series in a few years. So much for buying a series win, eh? Steinbrenner never learns, see early 80's Yankees for further proof. Star players do not a cohesive team make.

lloyd
01-02-2005, 05:26 PM
the luxury tax is a joke. and dont even get me started on Selig. Yankees are a joke. its always the same story line, and it doesnt equal up to an exciting product on the field, and in the end, the fans lose.

Joepritch2
01-02-2005, 05:38 PM
It doesn't? The Red Sox coming back from 3 down on the big bad Yankees wasn't exciting? (Ok, it wasn't to me, I view Boston as Yankees junior, but judging by the ESPN reaction, everyone else in the known world was excited)

What about seeing the Athletics and the Twins going up against the big payroll teams and sticking with them to the end?

What about seeing the Mets, who have about the 3rd highest payroll, suck an egg yearly?

Excitement can be found if you look for it.

lloyd
01-02-2005, 05:42 PM
It doesn't? The Red Sox coming back from 3 down on the big bad Yankees wasn't exciting? (Ok, it wasn't to me, I view Boston as Yankees junior, but judging by the ESPN reaction, everyone else in the known world was excited)

What about seeing the Athletics and the Twins going up against the big payroll teams and sticking with them to the end?

What about seeing the Mets, who have about the 3rd highest payroll, suck an egg yearly?

Excitement can be found if you look for it.

i agree, and the people who have been baseball fans forever see it and still love the game, but you cant attract new fans if they have to look for the excitement! Same story with hockey... funny coincidence, the two leagues with salary caps are the ones who seem to have the most exciting, appealing product to new fans! (NBA, NFL)

Joepritch2
01-02-2005, 05:46 PM
Yeah, not arguing that the MLB structure isn't flawed, but having a lower payroll doesn't guarantee doom, which is what I like about it. You can really feel that underdog over the favorite thing more than you really can in the NFL these days.

As for the NBA, what's so great about hearing about Kobe and Shaq on a daily basis and teams reeling off 3 championships in a row (which has happened 3 times in the 16 years I've watched sports, with a few 2 in a rows happening too)? :)

Angelus
01-02-2005, 07:51 PM
I love baseball. Nothing better than coming home after a long day at work (or school) and watching my Braves kick ass in an evening game.

That being said, the Red Sox had the second highest payroll last year. So it's not that much of a surprise they won...

earl2
01-02-2005, 07:56 PM
having a lower payroll doesn't guarantee doom

Try telling that to about two thirds of the teams in MLB. Half of them are out of the pennant race after the first two months of the season. Every now and then somebody will have a miracle year and actually make the post-season but it's usually a fluke.
Having a payroll like the Yankees and Red Sox doesn't guarantee a championship, but it means you'll always be close.

Joepritch2
01-02-2005, 11:15 PM
Twins and Athletics, meet the Mets and Dodgers. Which group of teams has payrolls consistently in the triple digit millions, and which teams are the winners?

Money helps, but money does not cure all.

Angelus, TOTAL agreement on Boston. I couldn't bring myself to root for them, even down 3 to the Yankees. I just held out hope the Cards or Astros could knock the winner off. No dice. If you use ESPN coverage as a gauge of excitement, however, the Red Sox victory ranks with... well, ranks over damned near everything, unless you count the made for ESPN movies, but you get the point.

Esks4ever
01-03-2005, 01:14 AM
"Money helps, but money does not cure all. "




I agree wholeheartly on this...I dont think payroll has the biggest influence on how well a team will do thru the season. It boils down to scouting and player development thru AAA and AA. And for many years Oakland was doing great in that aspect.. and more recently Minnesota had great scouting and player developement - arguely the best in the majors... Montreal also had great scouting and player development.. the stars they've brought into the leauge speaks volumes about that... i can't help but imagine would they have been able to keep some of their stars, how good their team woulld be, and I'd think they'd have at least one world series win.

Joepritch2
01-03-2005, 10:01 AM
Yeah, and I'd be first in line to advocate a salary cap, but only because it would benefit teams that scout well over teams with enormous cash reserves.

earl2
01-03-2005, 10:14 PM
Twins and Athletics, meet the Mets and Dodgers. Which group of teams has payrolls consistently in the triple digit millions, and which teams are the winners?

I give credit to the A's, who should be the model for every small-market MLB team. They have good management and scouting in place and have been able to be quite competitive recently. And yes, the Mets and Dodgers spend a ton of money and never live up to expectations, but going in to each pre-season, they always have a chance, which is more than you can say for most teams.