Like fans of other .500 clubs, I want to be left alone.

(NY Times): "The Yankees would have strong interest in Sabathia." (Fine, Hank likes to discuss such matters on an ongoing basis). Moving along, it sounds very similar to the Johan Santana deal. It's a bad idea for the same reason: it's too much money. ($140 million plus). Yankee stadium will be filled with guys from Kuwait, Qatar, Dubai, etc., which doesn't matter to some people. It matters a lot to me and is partly why I want a break from out of town stars looking to cash in.

• (NY Times): "But the going rate for a pitcher like Sabathia, who turns 28 in August, would probably be six or seven years at $19 million or $20 million a season" (Another 6-7 year deal for a guy with excess miles already on him who's had injuries that haven't been checked out).

As in the Santana deal, it's assumed the Yankees have great prospects half way out the door that the other team would love (in this case the Indians) both pitching and infield, no problem. Gone, see ya. It's frequently said, "the Yankees can afford to" do such and such. Forbes continues to say they're losing money, the stadium deal is far from over, and area residents' lives have drastically changed for the worse with the rise in the price of oil. I don't believe it's right to say the Yankees can afford anything unless one has seen seen their books (maybe someone has).

• (NY Times): "The Yankees, who are shedding more than $75 million in salaries this winter,

could afford to re-sign him.

• They also have the prospects Cleveland would want and the motivation to deal.

...and a pitcher like Sabathia

• could elevate them to contention." And,

".. The Indians would obviously need pitching if they traded Sabathia, and they are also thin in the infield."

• (The Yankees have so many needs themselves, I'm a long way from worrying about Cleveland's needs. The Dolan family owns the Indians, they've got plenty of money. If the situation is dire, Bud Selig can go back to his idea of contraction.).

Lastly, Hank has confirmed the mandate is NO LONGER ABOUT WINNING every year. (The Times mentions a reason for giving up young players and taking huge payroll and risk is "a mandate from ownership to win every season" but that has officially changed according to Hank). He has said this team is about the next 10 years, that it's about nurturing his idea of a "Josh Beckett." If the mandate were to win the World Series in 2008, Hank would have provided a late inning setup man (to go 1,2, or 3 innings) to replace Joba Chamberlain whom he removed from that role. He said he'll worry about the bullpen later.

• There are many urgent matters that need attention in baseball, but the Sabathia thing isn't one of them. I would like the same treatment afforded to other .500 clubs' fans. I want to be left alone. (sm)

Tweet Stumbleupon StumbleUpon