Outside the Box
Keeping track of Baseball-Reference.com and the stathead world / RSS/Atom FeedFriday, December 1
Yahoo! Sports: Cone next on Yankees' agenda
"seem to be able" ?! It's called money, Bernie. Before you write in accusing me of anti-Yankee bias, I'll come clean. I hate the Yankees. I don't hate many things, but I do hate the Yankees, excuse me,HATE the Yankees. If that means you stop reading me, good!, we don't need any more Yankee backers here than we have already. ;-) And I'm not so wild about the Mets, either.
Back to the main topic of the article. I think Cone is a great gamble for a half milion. For a one-year deal, I might go at least up to $1.5m or $2.5m on him, and I wouldn't be surprised if some teams are telling him just that. In 1997-1999, the guy was very, very good, and I doubt he has lost it that quickly. Part of what could be happening here is that Cone's signability drops like a rock if the Yankees offer him arbitration, so we've got a game of chicken.
The Yanks don't want to pay him arbitration dollars. You would have a hard time convincing me he is only worth a $1m. On the flip side, Cone wants to make as much as he can and it looks like the Yanks are really low balling him. From his ten age-based comps, Key, Welch, Buhl, Stewart, Lemon, Langston, and Sutcliffe were all done at age 37, but Finley, Hershiser, and Tiant had another few years in them. For $2-3m, I would sign David Cone in a heartbeat.
``We just seem to be able to pick up quality players to take us to the highest level and reach our goal,'' Bernie Williams said. ``With Mike now joining our team, we have the chance to do something very special. We have four aces in a five-man rotation, and it's comforting to know that we have a special pitcher taking the mound for us every day.''
"seem to be able" ?! It's called money, Bernie. Before you write in accusing me of anti-Yankee bias, I'll come clean. I hate the Yankees. I don't hate many things, but I do hate the Yankees, excuse me,HATE the Yankees. If that means you stop reading me, good!, we don't need any more Yankee backers here than we have already. ;-) And I'm not so wild about the Mets, either.
Back to the main topic of the article. I think Cone is a great gamble for a half milion. For a one-year deal, I might go at least up to $1.5m or $2.5m on him, and I wouldn't be surprised if some teams are telling him just that. In 1997-1999, the guy was very, very good, and I doubt he has lost it that quickly. Part of what could be happening here is that Cone's signability drops like a rock if the Yankees offer him arbitration, so we've got a game of chicken.
The Yanks don't want to pay him arbitration dollars. You would have a hard time convincing me he is only worth a $1m. On the flip side, Cone wants to make as much as he can and it looks like the Yanks are really low balling him. From his ten age-based comps, Key, Welch, Buhl, Stewart, Lemon, Langston, and Sutcliffe were all done at age 37, but Finley, Hershiser, and Tiant had another few years in them. For $2-3m, I would sign David Cone in a heartbeat.
posted by Sean Foran # 8:35 AM 
Archives
11/01/2000 - 12/01/2000 12/01/2000 - 01/01/2001 01/01/2001 - 02/01/2001 02/01/2001 - 03/01/2001 03/01/2001 - 04/01/2001 09/01/2005 - 10/01/2005
