The Yankees haven’t yet been able to bolster their starting staff with a key addition, which has been the cause of great concern in Yankees Universe. All winter long, fans and team executives have repeatedly stated that the off season resolves around pitching, pitching, pitching, but maybe they’ve all been looking at the wrong end of the staff? Instead of seeking out other teams for reinforcements, perhaps the team, and its fans, should start looking inward? If relief is on the way, it could be coming from the bullpen.

In 2011, Yankees’ relievers posted an ERA of 3.12, which was the team’s sixth lowest rate since 1974. The bullpen’s fWAR of 7 was also the Yankees’ sixth highest total over the same span, which helps explain why the Bronx Bombers were able to win 97 games with a starting staff that stumbled down the stretch and finished the season with an ERA above 4.00.

ERA Differential between Yankees’ Rotation and Bullpen, Since 1974
Source: fangraphs.com

The 0.91 ERA advantage enjoyed by the relievers in 2011 was one of the largest gaps in favor of the bullpen over the last 38 seasons, but, during the Joe Girardi era, that has been par for the course. In all four seasons as manager, Girardi’s relief corps has posted a lower ERA than his starting staff, which supports a widely held perception that bullpen management is one of his strong suits as a manager. Then again, since 1974, only four Yankees’ teams have featured a rotation with an ERA lower than the bullpen, so the trend actually dates back long before Girardi.

WAR Contribution by Yankees’ Pitching Staff, Since 1974
Source: fangraphs.com

Although a strong bullpen can definitely hide the flaws of a shaky rotation, when the components of a pitching staff get too far out of balance, the result usually isn’t positive. For example, in four seasons, the Yankees’ bullpen posted an ERA that was one run lower than the starting staff, and in all but one, the team finished under .500. A similar relationship also exists when looking more broadly across major league baseball. On average, the stronger a team’s relievers get relative to their starters, the less success it usually has. Of course, that trend is being driven by rotation ERAs that are so high, even a mediocre bullpen would shine in comparison.

Team Winning Percentages Based on Starter/Reliever Differential
Note: 1981 and 1994 strike years omitted. A negative differential (blue bars) indicates starters had a lower ERA; a positive differential (gray bars) indicates relievers had a lower ERA.
Source: fangraphs.com

One variable that impacts any comparison between bullpen and rotation is innings. Since 1974, on one extreme, Billy Martin’s 1980 Athletics logged 1,051 more innings from their starting staff (much to the dismay of Mike Norris and Brian Kingman), while at the other end of the spectrum, Sparky Anderson’s last Tigers team managed fewer than 200 more innings from the rotation. In 1995, Captain Hook lived up to his nickname as no starting pitcher surpassed 150 innings.

Best and Worst Bullpens and Rotations, by ERA and fWAR
Source: fangraphs.com

At least Tigers’ starters managed a fWAR of 6.1 in Anderson’s last season. Since 1974, the 2007 Nationals had the only rotation to yield a negative rating. In the bullpen, negative fWAR contributions are much more common, so the strong positives really standout. Although no relief corps in the period under consideration has exceeded 10 fWAR, five teams have come within one win. The 2006 Twins’ total of 9.7 tops the list, but the Yankees’ 1996 bullpen, which featured Mariano Rivera setting up John Wetteland, is not that far behind.

In terms of WAR differential, the 2011 Phillies’ starters contributed 24.1 more wins above replacement than its relievers, the highest total since 1974. Once again, however, don’t blame the bullpen. Only the 1997 Braves had a higher fWAR from its rotation (the 2003 Yankees had the third highest total). Not surprisingly, the aforementioned 2007 Nationals’ rotation sports the largest fWAR deficit at 2.6, but three other teams also had a season in which its relievers contributed more to winning (or, perhaps more accurately, contributed less to losing).

Highest and Lowest Starter/Reliever Differential, Since 1974
A negative differential indicates starters had a lower ERA; a positive differential indicates relievers had a lower ERA/fWAR. The reverse is true for fWAR.
Note: Source: fangraphs.com

Even if the Yankees enter the 2012 season with the rotation as it exists today, the team’s starter do not seem to be in jeopardy of being added to any of the ignominious lists mentioned above. However, the bullpen could end up making its mark with a very positive accomplishment. Undoubtedly, Brian Cashman will continue to search for a quality upgrade in the rotation, but even if one is not forthcoming, the entirety of the team’s pitching staff could be more than capable of another very successful season.

Yankees’ 2011 WPA Distribution

Source: Baseball-reference.com

Looking at the graph above, it’s easy to see why so much of a baseball season can seem like a blur. Over 57% of Yankees’ plate appearances registered a WPA of 2% or less, while 84% of trips to the plate moved the needle by 5% or less. Of course, without all of these seemingly inconsequential moments, the dramatic events that exist as outliers wouldn’t be possible. Listed below are those highlights and lowlights, both ranked by WPA.

10 Best Plate Appearances, Ranked by WPA

Source: Baseball-reference.com

10 Worst Plate Appearances, Ranked by WPA

Source: Baseball-reference.com

Judging by the very forgettable nature of the two lists above, maybe using WPA to define memorable wasn’t such a good idea? After all, Derek Jeter’s 3000th hit doesn’t even crack the top 150 in terms of WPA, and that milestone will probably wind up as one of the most memorable moments in his storied career. So, when Yankees’ fans look back over the 2011 season, their mental scrapbook probably won’t resemble the WPA rankings.

However, Red Sox fans might have another take. Included on each list above is an at bat that defines both the beginning and end of Boston’s epic collapse. Before Russell Martin’s RBI double off Daniel Bard on September 1, it looked as if it was the Yankees that would be playing for the wild card, but after the Bronx Bombers’ comeback victory, the Red Sox went into a tail spin. What followed was an unfathomable 8-19 stretch and pennant race nose dive that culminated in the Yankees’ 8-7 loss to the Rays on September 28. Evan Longoria’s walk off home run in the bottom of the 12th inning of that game will always be remembered in Tampa, but you can’t blame Red Sox’ fans if they dwell on Jorge Posada’s fielder choice that short circuited a Yankees’ rally in the top of the inning.

Randy Levine (l) and Lonn Trost (r) flank Derek Jeter during a ceremony honoring his 3,000th hit. (Photo: Getty Images)

Responding to the question about whether the team’s spending philosophy has changed, Trost dismissed the idea that the Yankees were being more cautious, but stated that the team was trying to be smarter. According to Trost, the Yankees do not believe the dollars being spent in the current market are commensurate with the abilities of the players available, putting the organization in a position to depend on its minor league system. In particular, Trost cited Manny Banuelos, Dellin Betances, Hector Noesi, Jesus Montero, and Austin Romine as prospects that could make an impact next season. He also suggested that because of the team’s high expectations for those players, there hasn’t been a need to overspend as in the past.

Levine’s segment on GDNY was much shorter than Trost’s appearance on WFAN, and the hosts didn’t have the same sports background as Jones and Carlin, but there were several pointed questions about the Yankees’ winter designs. When asked about the team’s need of pitching, Levine responded that the organization was always looking to get better and that if an opportunity presented itself, Brian Cashman would be on it. Levine also touched on the Yankees’ potential interest in Cuban outfielder Yoenis Cespedes, stating that it was in the best interest of the organization to keep their level of involvement a secret.

Although the substance of each interview was different, Trost’s and Levine’s tone suggested that team’s inactivity was more about waiting for the right target than not wanting to spend. However, in what appeared to be a throwaway line, Levine’s remark about secrecy regarding Cespedes may have been telling. Considering the propensity of agents to use the Yankees’ financial strength as leverage, often times against themselves, it’s easy to see why the team would promote the idea that its free spending days are a thing of the past. After all, if the Yankees really had no intention to spend this offseason, what advantage would be gained by letting everyone know? Not only might that disclosure save a competitor some money, but it could alienate some fans and tarnish the Yankees’ image.

No new ground was broken in either interview, but the sentiments expressed by both men suggest that the Yankees have a coherent game plan based on their evaluation of internal prospects and players available on both the free agent and trade markets. Granted, some fans will continue to read into these comments that the Yankees simply do not want to spend money, but in reality, it just seems like they haven’t found anyone they want to spend it on.

Ed Whitson sports a grin on the day he signed with the Yankees. It would be one of the last times he smiled while in pinstripes.

In his brief four-year career, Kuroda has been a solid starter, posting a cumulative WAR of 8.6 and ERA+ of 114. However, the Dodgers’ right hander will be 37 next year, so, even if his transition from the N.L. West wasn’t already a concern, the risks associated with his age would be reason enough for pause. Of course, that doesn’t mean Kuroda wouldn’t represent an upgrade in the Yankees’ shaky rotation, but at the reported cost of $12 million (not to mention the corresponding luxury tax hit of roughly $5 million), it’s hard to argue that the marginal value would justify the additional expenditure.

Back in the winter of 1984, the Yankees were in a similar situation. Despite having a top offensive team, which was bolstered by the earlier addition of Rickey Henderson, the pitching staff was a jumble of question marks (and there wasn’t a CC Sabathia to serve as an anchor). As luck would have it, however, there was pitcher from the N.L. West available on the free agent market. His name was Ed Whitson.

The Yankees officially signed Whitson on December 27, 1984. In order to win his services, the team had to outbid the San Diego Padres and Atlanta Braves, and the courtship efforts included a personal visit from the Boss himself. Although Whitson stated he was impressed by Steinbrenner’s sincerity, what ultimately swayed his decision was the $4.5 million guaranteed over five years. Off the bat, Whitson made that clear, which in retrospect, was probably the first sign that his time in New York would not go as planned.

The number one thing was the security of my family. Baseball is second. It’s a game. It’s something I enjoy doing.” – Ed Whitson, quoted by AP December 28, 1984

In retrospect, there shouldn’t have been such great expectations for Whitson. In his breakout season the year before, his ERA+ was only 111, WAR only 2.6, and he struck out a mere 103 batters in 189 innings. However, this was 1984, so what stood out was his 14-8 record with a 3.24 ERA. As a result, the former Padres’ righty was viewed as a big addition. Unfortunately, it wouldn’t take long for that perception to change

Ed Whitson underwent a baptism by fire with the Yankees. His first start was a 14-5 loss to the Red Sox at Fenway Park, after which it was revealed that he suffered from back spasms earlier in the week. Whitson downplayed the injury after letting the cat out of the bag, but either way, Steinbrenner wasn’t exactly in a forgiving move. Just two days into the season, the Yankees’ owner proclaimed, “I’d have to say our pitching stinks. They know they stink”. Welcome to the Bronx.

I felt tired, weak. I wasn’t going all the way through with my pitches. I was standing up when I released the ball. I guess I was compensating for my back.” – Ed Whitson, quoted by AP, April 13, 1985

As the season went on, things didn’t get much better for Whitson. During one particularly difficult stretch in May, the right hander went 0-3 with an 8.87 ERA in six starts. Needless to say, boos started reigning down at Yankee Stadium, but soon the cat calls would become the least of the ways in which the fans voiced their displeasure. On May 28, a “mob” reportedly chased Whitson out of the Yankee Stadium parking lot, and they weren’t seeking an autograph. Meanwhile, those less inclined to actually inflict physical violence relied on the U.S. Mail to get their point across. In a few short months, Whitson’s introductory comments about enjoying the game and providing security for his family seemed like a perverse form of ironic foreshadowing.

A lot of times I read the fan mail. If I feel good, I read it; if not, I don’t. I used to check it for ticking.” – Ed Whitson, quoted by the Record-Journal, June 27, 1985

Whitson and Martin didn't always see eye to eye.

During the summer, Whitson had a couple of solid stretches, and at one point actually improved his record to over .500. However, during the heat of the pennant race, the lid was blown off his disappointing season. Although the Yankees won a remarkable nine of his last 10 starts, Whitson could only muster 50 innings pitched to a 6.84 ERA. Unfortunately for the righty, the team’s success did little to disguise his failure or lessen the fans’ or his own frustration.

Ed Whitson’s season from hell came to head in a bar in Baltimore during a series in which his turn in the rotation had been skipped. On September 22, following a 5-4 victory against the Orioles, Whitson sat in the hotel bar stewing over his demotion when he confronted a fan he felt was paying to close attention to his conversation. According to most initial accounts of the fight, Billy Martin, who also happened to be in the bar, attempted to short circuit the altercation, but instead became involved in a brawl that continued in the hotel lobby and parking lot. By the time it was over, Martin had suffered a broken arm (later, it was revealed he also suffered two cracked ribs and an injured lung), while Whitson added a cut lip to his already bruised ego.

I wasn’t trying to fight, I was trying to break up a fight. If I was fighting, he would have been knocked out from the beginning.” – Billy Martin, quoted by AP, September 23, 1985

The Yankees didn’t suspend Whitson for the brawl, but Martin did one better. Days after the fight, the fiery manager announced to the press that Whitson would skip his start at Yankee Stadium to avoid being booed by the fans. Whether it was an uncharacteristic display of compassion or an attempt to embarrass the right hander, the move summed up Whitson’s first season in pinstripes.

After the season was over, Whitson requested a trade, but not surprisingly, the Yankees couldn’t find a taker for his hefty contract. Instead, it was Martin who was sent packing. Despite the change, Whitson was still anxious to escape from the Bronx. During the spring of 1986, the embattled right hander opened up about the extent to which he and his family were harassed during the previous season. Clearly, Whitson did little to distinguish himself in 1985, but sadly, many Yankees’ fans came away looking even worse.

It’s got nothing to do with the Yankee organization or the Yankee coaching staff. I’ve never had words with George Steinbrenner. The whole issue is my family’s safety.” – Ed Whitson, quoted by the New York Times, March 17, 1986

After returning to the Padres, Whitson had two of his best seasons in 1989 and 1990.

In Whitson’s first start of the 1986 season, he couldn’t make it past the third inning against the Royals and left the Yankee Stadium mound to a familiar chorus of boos. Following the disastrous outing, Piniella decided that Whitson would only start games on the road and be relegated to the bullpen when the team played at home. Because of the schedule, the Yankees soon had to abandon that plan, but then the situation became even more absurd when Whitson’s home start against the Indians was skipped because the pitcher was suffering from a bout of diarrhea. Whitson eventually returned to the Stadium mound during that series, and received a standing ovation from the crowd when he jogged in from the bullpen, but the era of good feelings was short lived.

Whitson’s scoreless inning of relief was the highpoint of the season. Over the next two months, which included a stint on the DL with sore ribs (probably not from too much laughing), he posted an ERA of 8.31 over 22 innings, most of which came in relief (his final two starts lasted a combined two innings). Now being called a “head case” on a regular basis, Whitson continued to shrink further into his shell.

I’ve run a lot of businesses and I’ve never seen one like him.  You need to be a psychologist, a babysitter and a businessman all roled into one. We’re through babying him”. – George Steinbrenner, quoted by the New York Daily News, June 19, 1986

Ed Whitson’s misery finally came to an end on July 9, 1986, when the Yankees agreed to send him back to San Diego in exchange for reliever Tim Stoddard. Elated to be freed from the Bronx, Whitson took the high road out of town, praising Steinbrenner and even complementing the fans.

They’ve got some outstanding fans there, that’s for sure, and I wish them all the best of luck, the Yankees and George Steinbrenner. I’ve got to thank him because he really did what he said he would do with the contract and getting me out of there if I didn’t like it. He fulfilled it. I can’t say enough about him. He never ripped me and he had plenty of chances, I guess. Until the day I die, I’ll respect him” – Ed Whitson, quoted by the New York Times, July 9, 1986

Sadly for Whitson, things didn’t immediately improve that much in San Diego. During a rocky first inning in his first start back with the Padres, the fans began to boo. The negative reaction wasn’t as vocal or venomous as in the Bronx, but it probably wasn’t the homecoming Whitson expected. Eventually, Whitson would regain his footing in San Diego, and actually rebound to have two excellent seasons in 1989 and 1990, but that didn’t stop him from becoming the poster boy for free agent busts, not to mention the first name cited when discussing whether a player can “handle New York”.

Hiroki Kuroda isn’t Ed Whitson. However, there is one parallel. Sometimes, it’s better to not get the “best pitcher remaining on the market”, especially when there are doubts about how well he’ll perform in the Bronx. Kuroda very well could end up doing just fine if he dons the pinstripes, but then again, the Yankees might be better off not finding out.

Papelbon's four-year deal with the Phillies has set the market for closers. (Photo: Getty Images)

When the Yankees signed Rafael Soriano last winter, it seemed like a reach at the time, and this year’s offseason activity has confirmed it. At 3-years and $35 million, Soriano’s AAV of $11.7 million is just a shade below Papelbon’s and well in excess of what the Marlins and Rangers gave to Bell and Nathan, respectively. Such is the advantage of being the only closer available on the market, especially during a year in which the Yankees aren’t trying to stay on a budget.

Despite the market glut, it seems likely that teams still wishing to acquire a closer will have to pay a hefty price in terms of dollars or prospects. That won’t impact the Yankees, however, because the team’s bullpen is both strong and deep. In fact, Soriano projects to be the “seventh inning guy”, which is very impressive when you consider he would be the closer on many other teams. So, perhaps Brian Cashman should be thinking about leveraging the Yankees’ relative strength and using the inflated closer market to help unload a contract he didn’t want in the first place?

With $25 million owed over the next two seasons, Soriano isn’t cheap. However, if the Yankees were willing to eat about $5 million, it would reduce his AAV to $10 million, or just over the $9 million that the Marlins will be paying Heath Bell. At first glance, that still seems too high, but when you compare the two pitchers over their careers, a similar salary seems appropriate. Granted, Bell has been healthier and occupied the closer’s role for longer, but the extra year on his contract could be viewed as the premium for that experience.

Tale of the Tape: Health Bell vs. Rafael Soriano

Source: baseball-reference.com and (*) fangraphs.com

Not only does Soriano compare favorably to Bell, but he also stacks up well against most other relievers since 2006. Obviously, health is always a concern with Soriano, but otherwise, the right hander is as talented as all but the very elite closers in the game. For that reason, the Yankees shouldn’t be looking to just give him away. Unless the team can immediately convert the cash savings into an upgrade in the starting rotation, the Yankees might actually be better off keeping a stacked bullpen and hoping a strong relief corps can compensate for a potentially shaky rotation. However, if another team values Soriano enough to consider taking on most of his now only two-year deal, Cashman should be ready to pull the trigger.

Between A.J. Burnett and Rafael Soriano, the Yankees are paying almost $30 million over the next two seasons to a pair of pitchers they (and most fans) would probably rather not have on the team. There has already been some talk about the Yankees unloading Burnett, so if Cashman could somehow find a way to trim Soriano as well, the offseason would all of a sudden seem like a success. More than just addition by subtraction, the added payroll flexibility might not only mean the Yankees can pursue a short-term starting pitcher, but it could also set them up well for a more aggressive posture next offseason.

Baseball Americarecently unveiled its new ranking for the Yankees’ farm system, and once again Dellin Betances and Manny Banuelos were featured prominently. Absent from the list, however, was Andrew Brackman, who ranked fifth on last year’s list. Of course, the reason Brackman didn’t make the list is because he is no longer in the organization. After only three minor league seasons and fewer than 350 professional innings, the Yankees decided they had seen enough of their 2007 first round draft pick.

Although Brackman’s and Betances’ status in the Yankees’ organization has diverged dramatically since this time last year, the two pitchers still share one thing in common: abnormal height. At 6’10” and 6’8″, respectively, both right handers rank among the tallest players in major league history. Perhaps not coincidentally, both pitchers have also shared a relative lack of command, which begs the question about whether height is a developmental impediment?

Tallest Pitchers in Yankees’ History (click to enlarge)

Note: For an in depth look into the curious life of Slim Love, click here.
Source: Baseball-reference.com

For whatever reason, the Yankees quickly decided Brackman would not live up to his potential, but the organization’s hopes for Betances are still very high. And some might argue that because of his unique size, it behooves the Yankees to be extra patient. After all, 6′ 10″ Randy Johnson didn’t find his true form until he was 26, so maybe it just takes tall pitchers longer to develop? That line of reasoning seems to make sense, but, unfortunately, the Big Unit is more an exception than the rule.

Stand and Deliver: The Best Tall Pitchers of the Modern Era  (click to enlarge)

Note: Based on pitchers since 1901 listed at 6’7″ or taller and with at least 500 career innings.
Source: Baseball-reference.com

Since 1901, only 110 pitchers have been listed at 6′ 7″ or taller (an inch was shaved off Betances’ height to increase the sample and account for some of the discrepancies in historical records), and of that total, only 35 pitched more than 500 innings. What’s more, only eight from the group averaged more than 3 WAR per 200 innings and a mere six compiled a career WAR greater than 20. In other words, it’s hard enough for a particularly tall pitcher just to make it to the big leagues, not to mention stick around for a long and successful career.

So, should the Yankees send Betances packing in a deal before his extraordinary height catches up with him? Well, not quite. Although it is true that taller pitchers are a rarity, their rate of success is impossible to determine with knowing how many have tried and failed to make the majors. Who knows, if not for the NBA, baseball could be overflowing with pitchers who cast a shadow all the way to the batter’s box? Regardless, what we can determine is the comparative rate of success between pitchers who are at least 6’7″ and those who are shorter.

Comparative Success Rates of Pitchers Based on Height  (click to enlarge)

Note: Includes all pitchers since 1901 with at least 500 career innings.
Source: Baseball-reference.com

Although taller pitchers reach the 500 innings plateau at a slighter lesser rate than their shorter counterparts, once they reach that lofty level, bigger does mean better. Over 45% of taller pitchers averaged at least 2 WAR per 200 innings and over 22% averaged at least 3 WAR per 200 innings, compared to 35% and 12%, respectively, for hurlers who measure less than 6’7″. So, if Betances doesn’t have a long and successful career, it probably won’t be because he’s too tall.

Before concluding, it’s interesting to note that while tall pitchers are rare, position players who measure at least 6’7″ are practically unheard of. In the modern era, almost 7,500 major leaguers have played at least five games at a position other than pitcher, and of that total only nine have been 6’7″ or taller (all played at least some first base). Luckily, Betances decided to take up pitching when he was a kid.

Position Players Listed at 6’7″ or Taller

Note: Richie Sexson is widely listed as being 6′ 8″, but B-R.com lists him at 6′ 6″.
Source: Baseball-reference.com

Nationals' fans may get down on their knees after their team acquired widely coveted Gio Gonzalez. (Photo: Getty Images)

There are a variety of differing opinions on Gonzalez. Some believe he is gradually emerging as one of the best young arms in the game, while others suspect he may not be able to continue outperforming his relative inability to throw strikes. As with most young pitchers, it’s hard to predict what path Gonzalez will take in Washington, but regardless, the Nationals’ aggressive move speaks volumes about the internal view they have about their team as well as the economic boom taking place throughout the game.

When the Angels signed Albert Pujols and C.J. Wilson, we learned that Arte Moreno’s shopping spree was being funded by a new multi-billion television deal. Similarly, the Rangers aggressive spending since being sold to the ownership group fronted by Nolan Ryan has been linked to TV money. Now, it seems, we can also add the Nationals to that list.

According to a report in the Washington Examiner, the Nationals are in the process of negotiating a new payout from MASN that could be substantially higher than the $29 million fee they currently receive. With the expectation of increased revenue, the Nationals’ decision to accelerate their rebuilding strategy makes perfect sense. Even though Gonzalez, who is entering his first year of arbitration eligibility, won’t cost the Nationals much initially, the price in prospects was very steep. The team’s willingness to cash in so many future chips for instant gratification must mean the Nationals either think they are ready to contend now, or have the financial wherewithal to significantly expedite the process. When Washington broke the bank to sign Jayson Werth last year, many pundits scratched their heads, but clearly, the organization has adopted a very optimistic outlook. Even though GM Mike Rizzo probably already regrets the decision to sign Werth, it says a lot that he and owner Mark Lerner remain undeterred in their attempts to quickly improve the team.

The Nationals have every reason to be optimistic. They were, after all, a near-.500 team in 2011, so any marginal improvement will gradually bring them closer to contention, especially when you consider the additional wild card that will be implemented this season. If Gonzalez continues his progression and Stephen Strasburg’s recovery from Tommy John surgery remains on track, the addition of those two pitchers alone could vault Washington right into the middle of the playoff picture. Although the offensive remains a little thin, especially in the outfield, the development of young players like Wilson Ramos and Danny Espinosa, combined with better health from Ryan Zimmerman, could further lessen the gap between the Nationals and the National League’s elite.

The Marlins have also been an unlikely aggressor this offseason. (Photo: AP)

Of course, the Nationals aren’t the only team in the N.L. East who seem willing to open their wallet. The Phillies have grown their payroll to levels only reached by the Yankees and Red Sox, while the Marlins have nearly doubled theirs this offseason. Although the Braves have maintained a very stable payroll over the last decade, the team’s finances are very healthy and its farm system very deep, so they too could quickly become participants in the N.L. East arms race. Ironically, the only team going in the opposite direction is the New York Mets, who are currently trying to sell off minority shares of the team, as well as special access to their mascot and other perks, just to remain solvent.

When money was tighter, hoarding prospects was the new market efficiency. Revenue-deprived teams like the Rays still successfully employ that philosophy, but for the most part, it seems as if the revenue boom in baseball has placed an emphasis on instant improvement. With little exception, baseball’s financial landscape has evened out, and competitive balance in the game has never been greater. When one of the few teams talking about a budget happens to be the New York Yankees, it’s a good sign that the sport is enjoying unprecedented prosperity. And, who knows, as a result of this changing economic climate, Washington might not only be first in war and first in peace, but, soon, first in the National League East as well.

Is Roy Oswalt the best option for the Yankees? (Photo: AP)

As the winter has progressed, and the Yankees’ Hot Stove has remained without a flame, there has been a growing disenchantment among the fan base. All of sudden, the likes of Oswalt and Kuroda have become “must haves”, and the Yankees’ lack of interest a sign of irrational fiscal restraint. Earlier, I suggested the team might be in a warped version of a rebuilding mode, and apparently, many in the Yankees’ Universe have taken that sentiment a little too much to heart.

Whether or not the Yankees are laying the foundation for when Cole Hamels becomes a free agent next season, there is no reason for the team to make a rash decision on players whom, only weeks ago, most would have agreed weren’t a great fit. After all, is a 34-year old Oswalt, who is coming off a season with a bad back, really what the Yankees need? Is a 37-year old Kuroda, who has spent his brief career in the NL West, any better?

As constituted, the Yankees’ rotation has several question marks, but the only real candidate to be removed for an acquisition would be Phil Hughes. Considering his struggles over the last season and a half, many fans would likely welcome a veteran replacement, but should the Yankees be willing to pull the plug on a pitcher who was not only a highly touted prospect, but has had some success in the major leagues? Granted, penciling Hughes into the rotation represents a risk, but the potential reward (a young, reliable starter under team control for three more years) suggests it should be one the Yankees are willing to take, especially when contrasted against what could be expected from some of the proposed alternatives.

If the Yankees’ signed Oswalt, Kuroda, or a pitcher of that ilk, it would be a sign that A.J. Burnett is here to stay and Hughes is probably destined for the bullpen. Neither decision would be in the team’s short-term or long-term best interest. Instead of settling for a stop gap measure, the best strategy, for both now and the future, would be to remove Burnett from the rotation and acquire a pitcher with staying power. Otherwise, the Yankees could find it hard to get ahead by opting for a fall-back.

Obviously, it will take some heavy lifting to dispose of Burnett’s contract, but there have been reports of interest from other teams. If true, maybe Cashman is currently working on a deal, one that could be the linchpin for another acquisition (John Danks or Gio Gonzalez, perhaps?). Admittedly, such a scenario is pure conjecture, but I’d rather hold out hope for a rotation that includes Danks/Gonzalez and Hughes than settle for one that features Oswalt/Kuroda and Burnett. Not only would that configuration represent an improvement in 2012, but it would also set the team up for a stronger rotation going forward (not to mention provide some financial flexibility for a run at Hamels).

Patience isn’t a virtue most Yankees’ fans possess, but before advocating a rush to judgment, it is worth remembering that the negative effects of a poor decision last much longer than the immediate gratification. The Yankees should be focused on making the right moves, not the most convenient ones, and fans of the team should have two words for those advocating panic: “Not Interested”.