craigwilliams
craigwilliams

Last week I addressed the excitement that New York Yankees fans continue to generate over John Danks.  To summarize that post as succinctly as possible: I’m not a fan of trading for John Danks.  HOWEVER, just over the past couple of days I’ve heard a little buzzing that perhaps the Chicago White Sox are most interested in building a package around the New York Yankees’ Austin Romine.  If that is truly the case, then I’ll change my stance and squeeze my way on to the bandwagon.  John Danks is neither here nor there though.  The guy on my mind tonight is the Philadelphia Phillies’ Cole Hamels.

This Hamels business seemed to come out of nowhere last week.  I think multiple experts brought up the idea that the Phillies could entertain trading Hamels.  Of course, every big name that hits the trade or free agent market has to be passed through the Yankees screening before anything else.  That includes anybody from Jonathan Papelbon to Jose Reyes and Albert Pujols.  There were a couple of hypothetical trade proposals tossed out by a couple of experts as well.  One in particular looked like this:

New York Yankees receive LHP Cole Hamels

Philadelphia Phillies receive LHP Manny Banuelos, RHP Hector Noesi, C Austin Romine and OF Mason Williams

Before I move on, I should note that the only reason there is any suggestion that Hamels could/should be moved is that he will be a free agent after the 2012 season.  A player of Hamels’ caliber would land the team that loses him with two compensatory draft picks.  Since draft picks are lottery tickets, most teams will attempt to trade their stud for prospects that are closer to the The Show.  This is more common for teams that don’t have the financial strength of the Phillies and, as far as I can tell, the Phillies have the ability to re-sign Hamels despite their growing payroll.

How about the trade though?  I’m one of the bigger prospect huggers out there so it probably won’t surprise you to hear that I’m a bit cool on this package.  Banuelos is the hang up here for me.  I like what Noesi brings to the table this year, but his ceiling is of a middle-of-the-rotation starter.  The Yanks have a handful of those to choose from so Noesi is expendable.  You can never have too many starting caliber catchers.  Especially starting caliber catchers that are near Major League ready.  However, Romine is another guy that might be squeezed out of a spot.  He’s not going to start over Russell Martin and for the moment the Yankees appear as though they are more committed to Jesus Montero as a DH/backup catcher because his bat offers so much upside.  You also have to account for the presence of Francisco Cervelli.  To make a long story short, Romine is also expendable.  Finally, you’ve got Mason Williams who put up some electric numbers with Staten Island this season, but that was in Short Season ball.  He’s miles away and is not the type of player that should put a snag in this sort of deal.

Two expendable players and a kid who has yet to get his first taste of full-season ball.  That brings us back to Manny Banuelos.  Is it worth it for the Yankees to trade their top pitching prospect for Cole Hamels?  Breaking the trade down to the point where it looks like a one-for-one makes you think “well, yea the Yanks should definitely do that”.  It’s still not that simple.  You have to consider the Yankees’ ability to lock up Hamels long-term beyond the 2012 season.  He’ll be 28 heading into next season so he’ll be young enough to warrant a long-term deal – probably five or six years.  Even if you do assume that he’s willing to sign the extension with the Yankees you have to ask if it makes sense to not only trade your top pitching prospect (and three other valuable ones) AND give another pitcher a nine figure deal.

If Dellin Betances replaced Banuelos I’d probably warm up to the trade package a bit.  I love the potential that Betances provides, but the Yankees can’t find spots for all of these guys.  That wouldn’t change the fact that the Yankees would be paying a substantial price in two forms of currency, but sometimes situations will arise where it makes sense to pull the trigger on a blockbuster deal.

Would this be one of those situations?  If you said ‘no’, I really wouldn’t argue with you that much.  I don’t like the idea of paying twice, but I do like Hamels.  Quantitatively you can look at his strong K/9 rate (8.45 for his career) coupled with stingy walk rates (2.26/9 for his career) and get a taste of the type of talent that Hamels possesses.  He’s not quite as allergic to homers (1.09 per game in his career) as you would like, but its not a deal breaker; and while he probably can’t be classified as a ground ball pitcher, his GB% has been trending up over the past four seasons all the way up to 52.3% in 2012.  For those who prefer qualitative evaluations and “clutchness”, we can look at his postseason track record.  Over 81.2 innings, he has produced a 3.20 ERA/3.51 FIP/3.31 xFIP – numbers that are a bit skewed by his sub-par 2009 showing.  That was a down year as a whole and, additionally, I’m not going to penalize him for getting worked by Alex Rodriguez and the New York Yankees.

The bottom line here is that Cole Hamels gets the job done.  I would find it mildly surprising if the Philadelphia Phillies didn’t stretch the payroll in order to keep this guy.  As far as the New York Yankees are concerned, I think Hamels is the caliber of pitcher they should be approaching if they are going to make a blockbuster deal.  I would still hesitate to see them include Manny Banuelos in a deal, but at least Hamels excites me more than the John Danks’ of the world.

Buy New York Yankees Tickets | Buy New York Yankees Apparel
Connect with Rant Sports
Get more Traffic

6 Rants to “New York Yankees Trade Buzz: Should Cole Hamels Be...”

  1. Jon Barton says:

    I was thinking the same thing,would not want give up Baneulos but could live with Betances. As I scrolled down I read your comment. I too could live with the second group. Right now my untouchables are Montero,Baneulos,Sanchez.And maybe Bichette Jr. That could all change by July though.

    • craigwilliams says:

      Yea, I’m the same way with Banuelos and Montero. The return would have to be Justin Upton-like for me to be happy trading those guys. As far as Sanchez, Bichette and a lot of the high upside guys in the low minors, I’d definitely like to keep them too, but I’m trying to balance out my prospect hugging. I figure that I should at least wait until these guys succeed at the Double-A level before getting too attached. It all depends on the return though.

    • T.O. Chris says:

      How can you have 4 untouchable players, none of whome have even a half a season of major league playing time, 3 of which have never played major league ball, and 2 have never even played in high A ball?

      No player should ever be untouchable, everyone is tradeable in the right deal. I still don’t get this love affair most Yankee fans have with prospects. My theory is that since we haven’t seen many come through the system that we have these unrealistic expectations for everyone of them, and we would rather see them fail in pinstripes than trade another one. It’s irrational to say Bichette Jr and Sanchez are untouchable, Banuelos and Montero make more sense but shouldn’t be untouchable either.

      The weirdest thing is at best Banuelos will develop into Hamels, but much more likely will develop into Gio Gonzalez. So to say you wouldn’t trade him for Hamels really makes no sense to me. One of the reason most fans of other teams don’t take us seriously is because most of our fans think Montero is going to be an all-star for the next 15 years, Banuelos and Betances are going to be co-aces, Romine is going to be a top 5 catcher, and Sanchez is going to be Montero’s mini-me, though I don’t know where he plays with Romine and Montero beasting it at catcher and DH. Logic says at least some, if not most of the prospects will fail to come close to the hype. It’s what prospects do. Only 30% or so of top prospects even make it in the league long term anyway.

      I’ve been cursed out for even suggesting that Montero is much more likely to be the next Carlos Lee than the next Frank Thomas, and I would be thrilled if he turned out to be Carlos Lee.

      • craigwilliams says:

        I have to agree – even with the Banuelos line of thinking. I’m probably as guilty as anybody when it comes to keeping prospects in a choke hold, but I’m trying to keep that in check. I do think fans of all teams do this with their prospects though. All of us see the successful prospects come up and fill their potential for other teams, so when our own teams have a few studs it is only natural for fans to get worked up, obsessive and possessive over them.

        It’s interesting that you mention Carlos Lee’s name as a potential ceiling for Montero. I think if a baseball god told us that Banuelos would max out at Gio Gonzalez and Montero would max out at Carlos Lee we would still be absolutely thrilled – which you said you would be as well.

  2. Phillies1 says:

    Their is no way the Phillies are giving up Hamels,
    their is rumors of a blockbuster with the phillies on here
    but that involves Victorino and not Hamels from your side I
    can see you wanting this as Hamels has grown into a complete pitcher
    and is still young but Ain’t Gonna Happen!

    • craigwilliams says:

      I would be surprised if the Phillies moved him. All the reasons that a team would want to trade for him apply to why the Phillies should/will want to keep him. From the Yankees perspective, one of the main points I wanted to get across is that Hamels is the caliber of player I want the Yanks to aim for if key prospects are going to be moved in a deal.

Leave a Rant

Agree? Disagree? Have a different opinion? Let us know what you think...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!