You Stole My Lunch, Dept.

Okay, we admit this was more than just a straight-up deal, that it was about the money, but this comparison is nevertheless fun for those of us who had to put up with Jeff Weaver last year:

Jeff Weaver: 0-1, 10.2 ip, 16 h, 5.91 era, .340 oba
Kevin Brown: 3-0, 21 ip, 16h, 1.23 era, .216 oba

And before you start whining about how the Yanks just buy whatever they want, consider that the seller here was the LA Dodgers, a big market team with self-inflicted wounds.

3 comments… add one
  • Not sure what your last comment means. So the Yankees could afford to take Brown off the Dodgers hands because the Dodgers signed Brown and Green to ridiculous contracts proves that this isn’t about the Yanks buying anyone they want? Your statement makes no sense, it’s a total non-sequitir. This trade was surely a baseball move, and also wholeheartedly financial (as you acknowledge). But let’s contextualize the entire deal: the Yankees wanted a starter, the best available at the time, to compete with the Schilling trade. Besides Vazquez, who they also acquired, that available pitcher happened to be the most expensive pitcher. The Dodgers were willing to take Weaver in the deal (their idiocy, as I imagine they could have held out for a lot less!), end of story. There are a few other teams who might have taken on Brown, but the Yankees and their wallet were the easiest target. So don’t fool yourself, it most certainly was about finding a team that could buy Brown (the Yanks, the Cubs, the Sox, whoever) as long as they wanted him. This isn’t whining, by the way – I have very little problem with the trade in the context of the AL East war and within the current financial context of the league, but surely this was almost all about buyers and sellers, and hence, almost all about the Benjamins – the Yankees’ Benjamins.

    SF April 15, 2004, 9:53 pm
  • Huh? As you note, I made it perfectly clear that this move was all about the money. The post was motivated by my happiness to be rid of Jeff Weaver. As for all of your analysis, yeah, fine, but you’re inventing an argument. My point with the last comment was simply that, in this case, the Big Bad Yankees were not robbing some poor, innocent small market team.

    YF April 15, 2004, 11:17 pm
  • And my point is that your comment is irrelevant to the issue about whether or not the Yanks can buy anyone they want. They can.

    SF April 16, 2004, 7:14 am

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Next post:

Previous post: