Tabloid sez, without any evidence, that Steinbrenners could sell Yankees

Journalists whine that bloggers make something out of nothing, but that was my reaction after reading today's Michael O'Keeffe and Bill Madden piece for the New York Daily News saying that the Yankees could be up for sale soon. Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but I think that sportswriters ought to have something more than hearsay and rumors and anonymous quotes before writing such an explosive story.

O'Keeffe and Madden write that:

Multiple baseball and finance sources told the Daily News they are hearing that the team the Steinbrenner family has led to seven World Series titles could be put on the block in the wake of the record sale price of $2.175 billion the Los Angeles Dodgers went for in April.

“There has been chatter all around the banking and financial industries in the city for a couple of weeks now,” one high-level baseball source told The News.

This is worthy of front-page and back-page covers in the New York Daily News? Because some anonymous Wall Street workers and baseball names are speculating about how much the Yankees could be worth, because the Dodgers were sold for so much? Spare me.

Look, it is always possible that the Steinbrenners could sell the team one day, or even sell it in the near future. But where is any evidence that this is going to happen? O'Keeffe and Madden do not have a single hard fact or on-the-record source showing that this could happen, yet they have written a news story, not an opinion column, saying that the Yanks could be for sale soon. There is only one named source in the article, Yankees president Randy Levine, who gave a flat denial to the News saying: "The Steinbrenners are not selling the team. Heck, there's not even an anonymous source saying that they will sell the team; just that they could sell the team. 

Full disclosure -- as long-time readers know, I used to work at the News, but my opinion would be exactly the same on this article whether I had worked there or not.

O'Keeffe and Madden not only make a whole lot out of supposition and rumors, they insinuate that Hal Steinbrenner may want to sell the team because he said this spring that he was a "finance geek" and that a good team didn't need a $220 million payroll in order to win. Then the article misrepresents Hal's position on the A-Rod re-signing in 2007, blaming Hank Steinbrenner for it.

They continue, "Hal Steinbrenner rarely attends games, and according to those who know him, abhors doling out the huge money long-term contracts such as the Rodriguez deal." Really? Then why did Hal sign off on that deal, as well as the CC Sabathia (seven years, and then an additional two years) and Mark Teixeira (eight years) contracts? Not to mention paying A.J. Burnett $82 million, and then paying nearly 2/3 of Burnett's last two years on the contract for him to pitch for the Pittsburgh Pirates?

Buster Olney wrote the definitive version of what happened in the A-Rod contract -- I talked about it in Subway Squawkers last year. The gist of it is that Randy Levine, not bogeyman Hank Steinbrenner, did most of the negotiations with A-Rod and his people. And A-Rod had to go to Hal's house and apologize in person for the opting-out shenanigans before he would sign off on the contract, which he did. Contrary to this story, there is no evidence that Hal opposed the A-Rod deal, just that he was ticked off over the opting-out stuff.

But who needs actual facts when the News can have sources who say stuff like this:

“Hal’s a smart businessman,” the source said. “And I’m just not sure that he considers baseball to be a smart business. I think he looks at some of these other owners, throwing $200 million at players and thinks they’re idiots — idiots that unfortunately can affect the way he does business. You have to understand, it was in Hal’s formative years in the ’80s when he saw George at his worst in terms of throwing more and more good money at bad players like Pascual Perez, Dave LaPoint, Steve Kemp, Ed Whitson and Andy Hawkins.”

Let's review. By buying the Yankees in 1973, George Steinbrenner was able to take an under $10 million investment and build a team worth several billion. Tell me in what other legal business you can get that sort of rate of return.  Sounds pretty "smart" to me.

Again, Hal signed off on all of the modern big-spending Yankee deals. He also agreed to bring back Brian Cashman, the GM who has one tool in the toolbox -- the ability to spend money. Sure, Hal has made it clear he wants the payroll to go down, but that doesn't mean 1) that he doesn't bear his own share of responsibility for the Yankee payroll and 2) that he is going to sell the team anytime soon. Besides, there are four Steinbrenner children who would have to sign off on the sale.

O'Keeffe and Madden end their piece by quoting yet another anonymous source who says: “Hal hates the players and he hates the media.”

So there you have it. Michael O'Keeffe and Bill Madden have declared that the Yankees could be for sale soon, with the "evidence" for this based solely on rumors, speculation, and twisting around of the facts. I am eagerly waiting for the News' next report, about how Ferris Bueller passed out at 31 Flavors.

What do you think? Tell us about it!

Hank Steinbrenner Strikes Back at Derek Jeter and St. Jetersburg

Oh, snap. Hank Steinbrenner is at it again. He seemed to take a direct shot at Derek Jeter, who is building a Florida mansion the size of a Best Buy, in saying that some Yankees were "too busy building mansions" to concentrate on winning it all last year.

Here's the full Hank quote:

"I think, maybe, they celebrated too much last year," Steinbrenner said Monday. "Some of the players, too busy building mansions and doing other things and not concentrating on winning. I have no problem saying that."

I think Yammering Hank can forget an invite to St. Jeterburg's housewarming party!

Now, do I think the building of Jeter's new home was a distraction for him? Absolutely not -- it's not like he was at the property with a hardhat hammering nails or something.

However, I do think that the 2010 Yankees were a little complacent, especially evidenced by Joe Giradi lah-de-dahing the last few months into a Wild Card, when they should have won the division. You keep the pedal off the metal for too long, sometimes it's hard to get the engine going again.

And I do think Jeter should have asked for help from Kevin Long months before. Instead, he spent literally half the season in the hitting doldrums before finally approaching the hitting coach in mid-September. Was that complacency or pride? Maybe a little of both. But I have been predicting a big 2011 for Jeter, with the Angry Jeter taking over.

That wasn't all Hank said today -- he compared revenue sharing and luxury tax money to socialism and communism!

"We've got to do a little something about that, and I know Bud wants to correct it in some way," Steinbrenner said. "Obviously, we're very much allies with the Red Sox and the Mets, the Dodgers, the Cubs, whoever in that area."

"At some point, if you don't want to worry about teams in minor markets, don't put teams in minor markets, or don't leave teams in minor markets if they're truly minor," Steinbrenner said. "Socialism, communism, whatever you want to call it, is never the answer."

The funniest part of this wasn't him getting all Milton Friedman here. No, the thing that made me chortle was comparing the Yanks as being the same boat as the Mets! Heh.

What do you think? Tell us about it!

Brian Cashman and Hank Steinbrenner speak out on the state of the Yankees

Hank Steinbrenner said Brian Cashman never got to personally meet with Cliff Lee when negotiating with him, and Steinbrenner blames it on the deer. In an extensive interview with Kevin Kernan, Yammering Hank explains:

"The fans pay the bills, we owe it to ourselves and to them to put the best product out there," Hank said. "If we couldn't get Cliff Lee, I'm really happy about getting Soriano. I just wish Lee would have given Brian the chance to meet with him, but [Lee] was on a hunting trip. He's got his own reasons."

A six-week hunting trip? What was Lee hunting -- the woolly mammoth?

And this is the first I've heard that Cashman didn't meet with Lee -- there was a whole to-do at the beginning of the free agent season about how Cash flew out to Arkansas to see him. What's the real story here?

At any rate, it seems that Lee's reported aversion to meeting with Cashman was a big honking clue that he wasn't coming here. So the current spin that the Yanks were stymied/blindsided by the rejection is just that -- spin.

The whole Hank interview is worth a read -- he predicted bounceback years for pretty much everybody in pinstripes, too. He also said the Yankees "just need to [bleeping] win"!


Anyhow, I noted yesterday about how Brian Cashman tried to justify his talking about Derek Jeter moving to center field by blaming the setting. He's continuing with that lame excuse in today's John Harper column:

"This is not a news event," he said. "I was having a baseball chat with fans. It was not a declaration of what we intend to do with Derek. It was hypothetical. It's no different than talking about Randy Johnson, when he was a Yankee, and saying that if he got to the point where he wasn't starting anymore, he could be a great short reliever."

Nonsense. Cashman made this comments at a breakfast in front of 150 fans and Mike Francesa, the biggest radio personality in town. Did he really think he could keep this quiet? What a lame excuse.

Besides, his answer wasn't a hypothetical. The Yankees have Jeter under contract for the next four years, and this is an issue they will have to face.  And does Cashman really think that comparing Jeter, the most beloved Yankee of his generation, to Randy Johnson's future is "no different"? Come on now. And I say that as someone who completely agreed with Cashman's stance on Jeter this offseason.

One other tidbit from Cashman's interview with Harper:

"My job isn't to make friends," he said. "My job is to do what's right for the organization. I'll do what I'm paid to do at all costs."

Forget about the talk of Cashman being a GM elsewhere next season. The whole "I'm not here to make friends" is straight out of every competitive reality show! I'm thinking "Survivor" will have Boston Rob oppose Cashman next year!

What do you think? Squawk back!

In defense of the Steinbrenner brothers

There are all sorts of stories coming out over the weekend saying that Brian Cashman didn't want to sign Rafael Soriano, but the team's ownership overruled him. And you know what? If this is the case, Hal and Hank Steinbrenner had every right to "meddle."


What the heck was Cash thinking in making such a big deal about keeping the 31st pick in the draft, instead of bolstering the bullpen? Trading for another bullpen arm, like Joakim Soria, would have cost the Yankees a lot more. Also, as reader Johnmouk noted to me, this prevents Jonathan Papelbon from donning pinstripes next year.

And as much as I love Mariano, the apparent thinking of the Steinbrenner family in being concerned about what would happen if Mo couldn't pitch anymore makes sense to me. The New York Post reports:

According to the source, ownership was worried about the bullpen's depth should Mariano Rivera suffer an injury. Cashman felt Joba Chamberlain or David Robertson could fill the closer's role if needed. But the Steinbrenners, along with team president Randy Levine, wanted Soriano. 

"He stated his case," the source said of Cashman. "But he understood. It's not like he threw a body block to stop it."

Why does Cash have so much faith in Joba or Roberston, especially given that he's the guy who traded for Kerry Wood last summer? Is this something worth going to the mattresses for?

And I don't get why Cashman is being so stingy about the draft picks all of a sudden. Since he became GM in 1998, there has been exactly one first-round draft choice, Phil Hughes, who has been a big-league contributor for the Yankees. And Gerrit Cole turned down signing with the Yankees. It's a crap shoot, and I will never understand who Cashman would put this pick ahead of improving the team now.

The New York Times' Tyler Kepner wonders when Cashman is going to publicly speak about the Soriano deal., writing:

Maybe Cashman simply changed his mind; he did not return phone calls Friday. But Cashman takes seriously his reputation for honesty, and at some point he must explain his reversal. The organization has run smoothly since Cashman demanded a restructuring of baseball operations in October 2005, and he must blunt the appearance that this might have changed.

I wonder, too. He was like a Chatty Cathy doll this offseason, and now he has nothing to say? Very strange.

What do you think? Tell us about it!

Could somebody please tell Hank Steinbrenner to shut up?

Just when it looked like the Yankees were starting to win the PR battle in their contract battle with Derek Jeter, some reporter had to reach out to Hank Steinbrenner for a quote. And, as expected, Hank said something stupid. Shocker, I know.

Hank, the Steinbrenner responsible for giving Alex Rodriguez that ridiculous 10-year, $275+ million deal, told the Associated Press last night:

"As much as we want to keep everybody, we've already made these guys very, very rich, and I don't feel we owe anybody anything monetarily," the Yankees co-chairman said Tuesday. "Some of these players are wealthier than their bosses."

The first part is technically true -- no star player has given the Yankees any hometown discounts -- but a little inartfully said. The last part is just silly. Even the richest player is a pauper compared to a baseball owner. Sure, Yankee star players may have a better cash flow than Hank probably does these days. But he's 1/4 owner of the richest franchise in sports. And it's not like he got that money on his own merits; he happened to be born into the Steinbrenner family. Bless his heart, but please, spare us the poor-mouthing.

Look, I'm on the Yankees' side here, but what Hank said isn't helpful. If he had to say anything, I wish he had done something funny, more along the lines of when he wondered if A-Rod wanted to go into the Hall of Fame as a Yankee or as a Toledo Mud Hen.
Blogger Dan Hanzus chastised the Yanks for not putting Hank in a panic room or something to prevent this from happening:

Unfortunately, Yankee officials were playing checkers when they needed to be playing chess, and that's how a reporter from the Associated Press managed to get through to Hal's loquacious brother, Hank, on Tuesday.

Heh!

What do you think? Tell us about it!

Where's Derek Jeter going to end up -- Cincinnati?

In a recent piece on Derek Jeter's contract negotiations with the Yankees, ESPN New York's Wally Matthews claims that the two parties are at odds, with Jeter supposedly turning down a generous three-year offer at $21 million a year.

Anyhow, Matthews quotes an anonymous source "inside the Yankees' hierarchy" who is "urging the front office to play hard ball with Jeter":

"Tell him the deal is three years at $15 million a year, take it or leave it," the person taking the hard-line approach said. "Wait him out and he'll wind up taking it. Where's he gonna go, Cincinnati?"

My guess is that the source is Hank Steinbrenner -- remember his line wondering whether A-Rod wanted to be a Yankee or a Toledo Mud Hen? And Big League Stew's David Brown thought the same thing as me about Hammerin' Hank being the source.

Yankee team president Randy Levine seemed to be speaking a tough stance, saying yesterday:

"Derek Jeter is a great Yankee and he's a great player," said Levine. "With that said and done, now is a different negotiation than 10 years ago."

Anyhow, shows you the Bizarro World we're in, that giving a 36-year-old shortstop $21 million a year is somehow deemed an insult, even though his actual value last year, according to Fangraphs, was just $9.8 million. (Incidentally, for those who make the inevitable comparison with the Yankees breaking the bank for A-Rod after 2007, Rodriguez had the best hitting season by a Yankee in 50 years; his value that season, according to Fangraphs, was $37.7 million. As ridiculous it was to give Rodriguez a ten-year contract, he was coming off two MVP seasons in the previous three years.)

It's going to be interesting to watch what happens. I've heard a lot of fans say "just give Jeter whatever he wants." But where does it end? If the captain is Mr. Team, Mr. Yankee, how much do the the Yankees have to overpay him in order to show that they value him?

I've also heard his 3,000 hit record, which he should achieve sometime in the first half of next year's season, as another reason to keep him on. That makes sense, but it is funny to hear the same people who said for years that Jeter was about intangibles and team, not about so-called "stat-padding" individual numbers, all of a sudden get excited about individual milestones with Jeter.

The conventional wisdom has been that the longer this contract negotiation drags out, the worse the Yankees will look. I think it will be the opposite. For one thing, what are Jeter's negotiating options -- is there some other team out there willing to pay him more than $21 million a year? Doubtful.

As for Cincinnati, given that the Reds declined a $4 million option on Orlando Cabrera, the 35-year-old shortstop, don't think that they're actually a realistic option for Jeter, either.

What do you think? Tell us about it!