Critique Brian Cashman!

Praise

Simply for putting up with all the nonsense, I'd say Cashman deserves praise. He's not yet been treated for a nervous breakdown, so I say you're a better man than I am, Brian Cashman.

As for his performance, well the cynic says anyone with that budget can do a good job. Overall, his acquisitions (no, not the ones thrust on him by His Bossness) have been smart. And this offseason there has been none of the stupid newsmaking deals that the Yanks seem to get into to steal headlines. For that I credit Cashman's new contract and clout. I'm thrilled that the Yanks have basically left themselves alone. They were a good team to begin with, and sanity has prevailed so far this offseason.

So overall, I give Cashman a B+. He's not Beane clever, but then he doesn't have to be. Yet he doesn't just coast on his riches, and he works hard.

by FunWithHeadlines on Dec 20, 2005 11:15 AM EST reply actions

Tough One

Cashman is probably one of the most difficult GM's to rate because of his unique situation. We can never be sure which moves are his doing and which moves are mostly guided by Steinbrenner. We also don't know how he would fare with a more limited budget. It's clear he's not terrible - the Yankees are a perrenial playoff team. And he seems to handle his stressful position pretty well, which is a good thing. But it's not clear how much credit he can get for his teams' successes. I suspect he's somewhere around "average" in comparison to other MLB GM's, but it's a very difficult judgment to make.

by FI @ Minor League Ball on Dec 20, 2005 11:18 AM EST reply actions

I don't think

he is Otto von Bismark. But you have to be a tough SOB to stick around there. For that alone, I give him some credit.

This is not a real critique, but I do not think that Cashman should be criticized for the payroll the Yankees have. If the money is there, then use it and he does. Whether he uses it wisely or not is another question, but I don't think Cashman should be criticized.

Overall, he has made some good acquisitions. I do wonder if it is the player or the coaching staff that often lets the Yankees down. Were Weaver and Vazquez bad acquisitions or was the coaching staff ineffective with them? I think the A-Rod trade was a great move, and he did it without all the media hype that Boston had surrounding the deal.

On the other end, there have been bad deals. The options in Posada's contract are absurd given his age. Mussina is overpriced and the Yankees could use that money more effectively elsewhere. Take your pick on what was worse last season: Pavano, Wright, or Womack.

Overall, I give him slightly above average. About a B or B-. It would be difficult to work under conditions when every year the media is reporting that your boss might fire you.

by count sutton on Dec 20, 2005 11:35 AM EST reply actions

re

At the time of the Mussina deal, I thought it was a good idea, and he has performed very well for them, for the most part. He starts to get overly expensive, but that's what happens when you sign a player to a long term deal like that, and it's not like the Yankees can't afford it.

I've heard that Womack was a "Tampa" decision, and not Cashman's. From what I understand, both Cashman and Torre were both fans of Cano and that's why they brought him up so quickly.

As for Pavano & Wright... well, I hated the Wright deal from the beginning, but I did think Pavano would be OK. I think we'll learn this year if Pavano can be effective as a Yankee. Wright instead of Lieber is still mind-boggling to me...

by jc3 on Dec 20, 2005 12:00 PM EST up reply actions

pavano was predictable

between park, dh and signing off a lucky (check out his babip) year, I expect (and still expect) an ERA around 5. As a Sox fan, I was ecstatic when he signed with the Yankees and not the Sox.

That said, other GM's tried to sign him to similar contracts, so I can't really hold Pavano against Cashman.

by cdamon @ Minor League Ball on Dec 20, 2005 9:21 PM EST up reply actions

...and Florida's park has...

fooled the best of them.

Remember the Mark Redman pickup in Oakland. That lefty was a stud for the Marlins for two years...so much so that Beane went out on a limb to get him.

Yet, he was terrible in Oakland, and whereever else he's been since.

Can't recall who wrote the piece, but in the new THT annual, the guy who analyses park effects comments that the #1 park effect in Florida is what it does to Ks. Simply put, batters strikeout more often in Florida...and significantly more. I wouldn't venture a reason, but it's an intriguing truth, that should change the way we judge these guys (Beckett, Burnett, Pavano, Penny, etc.) who have emerged from there.

by Azteca on Dec 20, 2005 10:49 PM EST up reply actions

ok...

I inflated Redman's time in Florida to two years. He was only there one.

But, here...check out his K/9 over the last few: With Detroit in 03, he had a 4.6, and repeated that 4.6 with Oakland in 05. With Florida in 04, it shot upward to 6.6.

Anyway, this is an aside to the Cashman talk; it's just something that got me thinking...

by Azteca on Dec 20, 2005 10:58 PM EST up reply actions

Sympathy

He is always forced to make a move, he can't look like he is standing still in that market even if its the best move. The way he has handled the situation speaks well of him.

by JFP on Dec 20, 2005 11:35 AM EST reply actions

Cashman critique

I think he's a good GM, but it is hard to tell because of the different factions of the organization. I do think that he is a hard worker and he is bright, so I would hire him to be the GM if I were a different organization.

Obviously, there have been bad moves made. Sheffield (not that he's BAD) instead of Vlad (younger, defense, etc.). Wright instead of Lieber. There are certainly others that can be argued.

But, he has begun to rebuild the farm, got outstanding contributions from Cano, Wang, and Small out of the minors last year, and made a good deal to get Chacon down the stretch. The fact that he has refused to part with guys like Phil Hughes this winter is a good sign to me because he's winning the power battle with Tampa to stick to the plan of building through the system. He realizes that using homegrown talent and complimenting it with veteran players is how they won, not the other way around.

Personally, I hope he stays for a long time and sees this through. Unfortunately, if they don't make the playoffs this year, I think he will be let go, and that will not be good for the organization.

by jc3 on Dec 20, 2005 12:14 PM EST reply actions

heh

Your Kaiser/Steinbrenner comparison can't help remind me of Daily News cartoonist Bill Gallo, who has been living off that one for about 30 years.

I think (the appropriately named) Cashman is really excellent. The great Yankee teams were built around SMART spending of money. They would sign huge-money free agents, but not every single year, and only to true superstars like Cone, Sheffield, Clemens and Mussina. They filled in around them either with cheaper FAs like Brosius, or with farm system products (the farm of course had already popped out a near-Hall of Famer in Bernie, and would go on to provide two HOFers in Jeter/Mariano, and three stars in Posada/Pettitte/Soriano). When a Posada or Soriano was ready, the guy in front of him would get traded; it was an orderly procession. The only bad contracts I can remember Cash giving out before '04 were to foreign players (Contreras, Irabu, some Cuban 3B who I don't think even made it) or non-baseball players (Henson.) As long as he stuck to domestic baseball players, Cashman was managing his money extremely intelligently.

Some of Cash's moves that didn't work out well were moves that looked, for all the world, brilliant at the time. I can't imagine who wouldn't have traded Jeff Weaver for Kevin Brown, a near-HOF pitcher coming off a 2.39 ERA season. And I thought the Nick Johnson for Javy Vazquez trade looked great too; even acknowledging Johnson's potential, Vazquez was a young guy who could get better himself, except that Javy already was good with a 3.24 ERA and 241 K's the previous year. You hear a lot about Giambi, but steroids or not, I think anyone with the money and a hole at 1B would have wanted him back then, plus he seems to be back to his old form anyway. I can't really criticize these moves.

The one black mark on Cash's resume IMO is the awful 2004-05 offseason. The Yanks most likely could have gotten Carlos Beltran had they wanted him. Instead, they spent the money on Pavano and Wright. Had they gotten Beltran instead and filled those rotation spots with Duque and Wang, they would be in a much, much better situation today -- they wouldn't be up against their salary limit; they would have performed better last season, even if Beltran had the off-season he did for the Mets, because Bernie was abhorrent; and they wouldn't be considering starting Bubba Crosby right now. That offseason, Cashman forgot what got him there, which was paying big money ONLY to truly great players.

That offseason is the one that really put the Yankees in the severe bind they're in now. However, note the superb way Cashman got the Yanks back in the race in '05. Unable to make trades due to lack of farm system talent or money to spend, he just churned through the available pitchers until he came up with Chacon and Small, two guys off the scrap heap who saved the season. I was very impressed by the way he handled the situation; it reminded me of a jockey whipping his horse back into the race. He was very aggressive and very smart. In a way, he is showing right now what he'd do on a team with no money to spend. And it's so far, so good on that.

IMO, he's top-notch. He does deserve his share of blame for driving the team into the ditch, with those three bad pitcher contracts (Pavano, Wright, Brown). But Brown was unforeseeable... and more importantly, you can't forget about the 10 years or so before that. Plus he corrected course almost immediately, and I don't think the team is even going to miss a beat as far as continuing to make the playoffs.

and boom goes the dynamite.

by Mean Dean on Dec 20, 2005 12:44 PM EST reply actions

Agreed

Getting Pavano/Johnson/Wright instead of Beltran is hurting this team.

by limozeen on Dec 20, 2005 12:50 PM EST up reply actions

Brown

I agree with a lot of this assessment, but you can't honestly look back and say that no one say Brown's problems coming.

His injuries were significant enough to limit him to under 200 IP in 2001 and 2002, he was 39 by the time he went to NY, and carried a hefty salary in the 15 million per year range. The Yankees took a huge risk in bringing in Brown, at the cost of a good young pitcher in Brazoban (head case Weaver was on his way out).

I also have to quibble with Cashman's bullpen construction. He (or someone in that organization) tends to throw money at free agent middle relief, rather than looking at youngsters like Brazoban and Bean. What ends up happening is that when those expensive players get injured, the downside isn't a league minimum salary, but something in the neighborhood of 2-3 million a year.

They might produce for a year, but when they go down, they cost the organization more.

Oh, and even if his career is going down in flames, the Mike Lowell trade still makes no sense.

by sasquatch83 on Dec 20, 2005 1:02 PM EST up reply actions

Torre

I think the reason Cashman never seem to bring up young arms ofr the bullpen is that Torre won't use them. How many times was Jason Anderson called up only to pitch one game and lose Torre's trust? I'm hoping that is something that will change this year and guys like Bean and Matt Smith will get a chance.

by dasperp @ Minor League Ball on Dec 20, 2005 2:35 PM EST up reply actions

beltran?

If Beltran was on the Yanks last season and ended up with the same .744 OPS that he had with the Mets, Yankee fans would be calling for his head. A .744 OPS is a little low for $15M/yr. People would be complaining about signing a guy to such a long contract for so much money for so little production.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm NOT defending the Wright (or even pavano) contracts. But going into the offseason last year, the Yankees' weakness was starting pitching, NOT offense. So the Yanks went for Randy Johnson instead of Beltran. It made sense at the time, in my eyes at least. Now, if Johnson sucks this season, too, then the decision will look even worse, but I expect Johnson to have a much better yeat this year (most new Yankees take a season or so to acclimatize, or so it seems).

by sabernar on Dec 20, 2005 3:33 PM EST up reply actions

So...

because Johnson is on your team he gets a 1 year pass...but it's automatically assumed that Beltran will continue on with this level of crappy production? I suspect that the Mets CF will rebound very nicely this upcoming year.

The Damon signing makes up for this oversight, however. The Red Sox couldn't have played this worse. On his interview, you could tell that Damon wanted to stay...

by akk99 on Dec 21, 2005 8:28 AM EST up reply actions

Giambi

Was a bad signing.

There wasn't a big need- the team's best prospect (Johnson) played first. As for the need for a bat, well, I can honestly say that at the time, without the benefit of hindsight, that the Yankees would have been better off leaving Johnson at first and addressing right field with a different free agent, whom I will not name, but who re-signed with the Giants after no one else threw big money at him and who has had a nice little career since then, notwithstanding last year.

by johnnyc @ Minor League Ball on Dec 29, 2005 4:00 PM EST up reply actions

Good

He's good for sure for what he puts up with, but if we're going to praise someone for winning with a small payroll, we have to rate him lower for winning with a huge one. I think the next few years will be very telling, since he resigned I have to think he's been promised full control.

Rios is the next Juan Gonzales, thats right, I said it.

by KaoticKlown on Dec 20, 2005 1:41 PM EST reply actions

First of all..........

I have to say that you seem like a very intelligent blogger. However, Rios will be no Juan Gonzalez in the power department. Hopefully he'll stay healthy and become a better all around player but in no way shape or form will he be a comparable player to Juan Gone. I happen to like Rios and hold out hope that he will develop some power but I see absolutely no resemblance to Juan Gonzalez......and that ain't all bad!

by the pinstripes on Dec 20, 2005 3:13 PM EST up reply actions

haha

I've expecting someone to comment on that line. BP listed Kotsay (2000) & Beltran (2001) among Rios's similars coming into the season, albeit with scores in the mid-30s--with 50+ being a good comparison.

And his 2005 was right on track with his pecota weighted mean...

Actual: 481abs, .262/.306/.397
Pecota: 456abs, .271/.316/.405

...so maybe he can grow into something much better than he's been. So far, however, he ain't been that great.

by Azteca on Dec 20, 2005 3:34 PM EST up reply actions

Cashman

Cashman was able to build the beginning of the Yankee dynasty at the beginning of the 90's when Big Stein wasn't allowed to be part of the day-to-day operations. Getting Wright and Pavano were bad moves, but he was able to get ARod. Getting Vazquez for Johnson was excellent. Telling Big Stein he had to do all the work to trade for Raul Modesi takes some marbles. Granted, I wouldn't want to trade for Mondesi either, but telling The Boss that he's gotta do the work himself b/c you don't believe in the trade is admirable.

Every good/great GM has some bad moves, and Pavano/Wright are most likely his worst moves, but they're not ones that are crippling the franchise. Cashman has done a tremendous job. Oh, and he's one of the nicest guys I had a chance to meet. No ego whatsoever, so I give him bonus points for that.

by lenred on Dec 20, 2005 2:11 PM EST reply actions

didn't gene michael...

build the yankees dynasty in the early 90's?

by DavidWrightismyGod on Dec 20, 2005 2:21 PM EST up reply actions

If we're talking bonus points

Cashman does get bonus points for telling Bill Singer to shove it during the 2003 Winter Meetings when Singer was making racist remarks towards Kim Ng.

by sasquatch83 on Dec 20, 2005 2:24 PM EST up reply actions

all in all i am not sure how...

anyone can truly grade him. True, he is in an unfortunate situation where the owner thinks he's playing fantasy baseball. But I don't know that you can really grade him because he really does not have a track record in the trade market where most Gm's really make their bones. granted he did get Arod in the trade market but that market was based more on $ than actual talent for talent.

He is in a situation where the club has consistently gone after the biggest name on the market. Until he is truly able to manage the club, via trade and FA, I would say his grade is incomplete. He has hit and missed in the FA market some to his own fault others beyond his control and those in his control no better or worse than any other GM on the FA market. He receives an incomplete because of his limited dealings in the trade an intermediate FA market where good GM's fill out rosters.

by cincod1 on Dec 20, 2005 2:36 PM EST reply actions

Why on Earth...

...Is Brian Cashman standing in front of a molecular DNA map? Oh, that's his draft board.

But it really does look like a DNA blot. Maybe he's attempting to clone Derek Jeter? If he could accomplish that, I'd rank him pretty highly as a GM. As is, it's hard to tell which deals are his, and which are the work of Steinbrenner. If you only assign the good to Cashman, then he's a good GM. Credit him with Womack, Wright, Johnson, etc. not so good.

Microbiology: The new moneyball for GMs.

by Stealfirstbase on Dec 20, 2005 6:28 PM EST reply actions

Farm System

I personally don't think too highly of Brian Cashman. Anyone could lure the big name free agents to New York with the kind of resources he has at his disposal. I believe the real stamp of a good GM is the ability to make deals that makes sense and works out for the team in the long run. Cashman has made some terrible decisions in terms of years of contracts (Sheffield, Williams, Posada, Brown, Mussina, to name a few). Also, I would like to point out the state of the Yankee's farm system. They got EXTREMELY lucky that Wang and Cano, but compared to others, those two were never considered top tier prospects (btw, I'm not sold on Wang, given his K/9 ratio, and Cano needs to learn how to take a walk). Its true that they havent drafted well, but its also true that they've made terrible trades involving their top prospects. For example, they traded away Posada's replacement (Dioner Navarro) for an aging Randy Johnson.

I know that Cashman faces alot of pressure to keep the Yankees competitive every year, and Steinbrenner has never heard the term "rebuilding year" before, but as GM, Cashman needs to care about the future of the franchise.

On that note, I do applaud his attempts to get younger (Pavano, Wright, ARod, Chacon, Wang, Cano). He is trying, but not hard enough.

by forage @ Minor League Ball on Dec 20, 2005 7:57 PM EST reply actions

actually...

think the Stein man's been mellowing the last few years into a semi-tolerable, harmless old wuss.

Guess he can't blame Cash for blowing his beans on proven (ripened?) ol-ferts since he's the one advocating (demanding?) em.

But when you need a center fielder and you got a stud center fielder in his prime years on the market...

if its in the cards he's gonna have a bad year or not...

should just be a no-brainer.

by dryice on Dec 21, 2005 12:10 AM EST reply actions

Johnny Damon

On a side note, Yankees just signed Johnny Damon to replace Williams in centerfield. I think this is a perfect example of one of Brian Cashman's flaws. He countered the Red Sox 4 year, 40 mil offer with a 4 year 52 MILLION offer. Given the market, I really can't complain about the length of the contract, but the pricetag is excessive to say the least.

by forage @ Minor League Ball on Dec 21, 2005 12:40 AM EST reply actions

Makes sense to me

If he draws the line at $44 million over 4 years, then Damon probably follows his heart back to Boston.

If he offers $48 million with a deadline- maybe Damon takes it, or maybe he makes a quick call to Red Sox and tells them that $44 million gets it done and that they have five minutes to answer or he signs with the Yankees.

No, I think the only way to get Damon was to blow the Boston offer out of the water and give him no time to shop the offer. So, if they wanted Damon, this was the way to do it.

Now, that's not to say that I think Damon was neccessarily the right move. I don't know that he's going to be $13 million dollar player this year, and I know that he won't be in 2009 (unless contract inflation is just totally out of hand). Boston is screwed for this year, because there really isn't anyone else worth paying that $10 million a year to left on the free agent market, but next off season they will have the money to spend.

by johnnyc @ Minor League Ball on Dec 29, 2005 4:12 PM EST up reply actions

Over-inflated

Now that they over-inflated Damon's contract, once Damon becomes useless, he's impossible to trade to another team. The Yankees are looking like the George Allen Redskins. When the Yankees crash,it will be difficult to pickup the pieces.All of their players are at the top of the pay scale and the minors is in shambles.The Damon signing will help in the short run,but not in the long run.

by slugggo on Dec 22, 2005 2:44 PM EST reply actions

I'd give him a "B"

on his baseball moves, but an "A" on how he handles some non-baseball (or at best tangentially related to baseball) moves.

The Yankee farm system has not done well under his watch. Some fans argue it's because the Yankees trade their best prospects, but before this past season, how many ex-Yankee farmhands were making an impact anywhere in the major leagues?

On the whole, the Yankees have done well with trades and free agents, but then again when you have the most money that's a little easier.

I would have given him more like a C+ coming into this past season, but you have to raise up his score now. Wang and Cano- I almost think it's a little fluky how well they did, but for now their body of work is just fine. Chacon was a steal, and that might look like one of the great trades in recent team history in another year or two.

by johnnyc @ Minor League Ball on Dec 29, 2005 4:06 PM EST reply actions