I have to disagree on a couple of points. First, I think Hughes CAN be a dominant starter, but he needs to develop a third pitch (that became evident through last year). His curve is tremendous, but his fastball isn’t good enough to truly scare hitters. It seemed at times that they were just sitting back and waiting for the big, looping curve because they knew they could foul off (catch up) to his fastball. If you add in a change to that mix, something that looks like a fastball coming out of his hands, but ends up 10 MPH lower, that will make every one of his other pitches significantly better. But that is the point. I think he NEEDS that third good pitch, that good changeup, to live up to expectations.
As far as him being worth it even if he isn’t a top line starter, I have to completely disagree. First, the Yanks are not just hesitating on this deal because of the money, and as a fan, I don’t care about the money. The column even admitted that Santana would MAKE the Yanks money. So, are we as fans now worried about HOW MUCH they make as a team? I’m not. As long as contracts don’t effect the team’s ability to compete and to sign needed free agents, I don’t care if they make a little less with Santana than they would with Hughes and his non-existent contract.

I agree. There is no doubt in my mind that the Yanks, especially Cashman, believe Hughes is going to be number one starter quality. As a Yankee fan, I would like nothing more than that. If you told me right now I could sign on for one of two scenarios, either a.) Hughes stays and becomes a big pitchers or b.) Santana comes and remains a dominant pitcher throughout his career, I would choose A irregardless of the money involved because I would always rather see young, homegrown kids succeed. But the problem I had with the column was that he was talking about Hughes values as an average pitcher as opposed to Santana’s value as a top end pitcher. My point was that, IF Hughes ends up being just average, it effects the rotation in a negative way, just as Santana being that ACE quality starter would effect the rotation in a positive way, which would means something in terms of dollar figures. I was commenting off of his premise. If Hughes is great, everything is wonderful. If Hughes is average or below average, as you stayed, the Yanks messed up (which I completely agree with), and that would seem to be in conflict with what he was saying.
Personally, as long as Santana doesn’t end up on the Sox I am okay with not getting him and staying the course with Hughes. If the Sox get him, boy, it really puts the Yanks in a hole.

Haha who proof-read his article? Miguel Cabrera? C’monnnnnn!

It doesn’t really matter in the scheme of things whether they’re bff’s or if secretly they despise each other, and I do agree that this is going to end up being some kind of ploy to pull the “I don’t know if he did steroids because we weren’t that close anyhow” card.

I guess we’ll find out next month for sure.

It would be completely understandable if Andy was tired of being in Roger’s shadow. And I also heard that Andy enjoyed being one of, if not the, senior leader of the pitching staff before Roger came back. But Davidoff wasn’t saying that they were no longer as close as they used to be, he was saying they were never very close — it was all a media creation.

I wasn’t saying that I didn’t believe that – I’ve certainly commented often enough about media fabrications. I just thought the tone of Davidoff’s article was a little too credulous, and that he neglected to ask some obvious questions.

I think we’re good for 95 wins. A lot will depend on the offense. We can expect less from ARod and Posada, but we should get more from Giambi, Melky, JD and Matsui.
I think that ARod and the entire team will be more relaxed and having some fun. It could be a gtreat year.