Yankees on verge of signing Manny Ramirez?

[defense]

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2008/1....html#comments

According to a report in the Dominican newspaper Impacto Deportivo, the Yankees are on the verge of signing Manny Ramirez to a three-year, $75MM deal. The report says negotiations are advanced and an announcement would take place Monday or Tuesday. If true, this would be an incredible scoop. However, there is reason for skepticism. The money and timing just don't seem right.

[HoustonGM]

Hm...perhaps my memory is foggy, but when was the last time one team signed 3 of the top free agents in the same offseason?

[ragecage]

Hm...perhaps my memory is foggy, but when was the last time one team signed 3 of the top free agents in the same offseason?

I wouldnt doubt it would be the Yanks.

[defense]

If true, where would Manny play? That would be my concern, although having two of the best power hitters hitting back to back would be scary good

[ragecage]

I dont think it would help them that much to be honest. It seems like nowadays the teams that look the best "on paper" usually crack under pressure.

[defense]

We need another power hitter
Manny is one of the best power hitters of this generation

I don't see how this move wouldn't help

[HoustonGM]

If true, where would Manny play? That would be my concern, although having two of the best power hitters hitting back to back would be scary good

Right now, it's what....

C - Posada
1B - Swisher
2B - Cano
3B - A-Rod
SS - Jeter
LF -
CF -
RF -
DH -

Melky Cabrera, Johnny Damon, Xavier Nady, Hideki Matsui, and Manny Ramirez are the remaining 5 guys to fill those 4 slots. Personally, to maximize production on both sides of the field, I'd probably go with an outfield of Matsui in left, Damon in center, and Nady in right, with Manny as the DH. Manny really SHOULD DH at this point. Cabrera should get a good deal of playing time as a late-game defensive replacement for Matsui, coming in to play center with Damon shifting to left. You also have to account for the odds that Damon/Matsui/Ramirez are all aging and/or prone to injury, so they will, in some combination, miss a chunk of time for which Cabrera will be the starter.

I dont think it would help them that much to be honest. It seems like nowadays the teams that look the best "on paper" usually crack under pressure.

I'm just saying, but on the whole in recent years, the Red Sox have basically been the best team on paper...and well...do I need to say much more than that?

[etothep]

didn't they trade cabrera for cameron?

[HoustonGM]

didn't they trade cabrera for cameron?

It was rumored to be very close but was never completed, and may never be completed. If it does wind up happening, I would probably go with Damon in left, Cameron in center, and a Matsui/Nady platoon in right, with Manny DHing.

[Pavelb1]

Hm...perhaps my memory is foggy, but when was the last time one team signed 3 of the top free agents in the same offseason?

I dunno, but i presented a hypothetical scenario in the summer, that everyone ridiculed me about (even though it wasn't even mine) that I'm gonna break out.

[ragecage]

I'm just saying, but on the whole in recent years, the Red Sox have basically been the best team on paper...and well...do I need to say much more than that?

No, but the Yankees were the best team on paper before that, and well, they choked. If I had to put a years salary I still say Tampa is the better team no matter what the Yanks do.

[HoustonGM]

No, but the Yankees were the best team on paper before that, and well, they choked.

Before when? In the last few years, it's been the Red Sox.

And exactly what is "choking" to you? Not winning the World Series? Because, that's the only definition I can come up with that would consider the Yankees as "chokers", and I think that's an awfully harsh (and inaccurate) label to put on to 29 different teams every single year. By any reasonable definition of success, the Yankees have been extremely successful in the last decade and a half.

Having not won the World Series since 2000 isn't indicative of any 'choking', unless you're using a different definition of "choke" (and when I think "choke" I think "cracked under pressure", which is what it appears you're using as well). In a 30 team league with an 8 team, 3 round playoff system, the World Series winner is really rarely the best team in the league, and the playoff teams that didn't win the World Series didn't "choke", unless we take "choke" to simply mean "losing a 5 or 7 games series." Losing a playoff series does NOT mean that the team "cracked under pressure."

If I had to put a years salary I still say Tampa is the better team no matter what the Yanks do.

I haven't looked into the teams that closely, and won't until spring, but just off the top of my head, I don't think I'd disagree.

[5DiMaggio]

Before when? In the last few years, it's been the Red Sox.

And exactly what is "choking" to you? Not winning the World Series? Because, that's the only definition I can come up with that would consider the Yankees as "chokers", and I think that's an awfully harsh (and inaccurate) label to put on to 29 different teams every single year. By any reasonable definition of success, the Yankees have been extremely successful in the last decade and a half.

Having not won the World Series since 2000 isn't indicative of any 'choking', unless you're using a different definition of "choke" (and when I think "choke" I think "cracked under pressure", which is what it appears you're using as well). In a 30 team league with an 8 team, 3 round playoff system, the World Series winner is really rarely the best team in the league, and the playoff teams that didn't win the World Series didn't "choke", unless we take "choke" to simply mean "losing a 5 or 7 games series." Losing a playoff series does NOT mean that the team "cracked under pressure."


I haven't looked into the teams that closely, and won't until spring, but just off the top of my head, I don't think I'd disagree.

The only time we have choked is in 2004 IMO

[HoustonGM]

The only time we have choked is in 2004 IMO

Do you really think that those Yankees were any more susceptible to pressure than any other version of the team? Entire teams aren't likely to wilt under pressure. **** just happens.

[5DiMaggio]

Do you really think that those Yankees were any more susceptible to pressure than any other version of the team? Entire teams aren't likely to wilt under pressure. **** just happens.

I'm just saying. You can't go up 3-0 and lose though.