Skip to content

The Yankees are listening to offers for Granderson, Hughes and Nova

Dec 6, 2012, 11:01 AM EST

phil hughes getty Getty Images

We heard about the Yankees’ willingness to listen to offers for Curtis Granderson the other day, but Andrew Marchand of ESPN New York says that they’re willing to listen to offers for Phil Hughes and Ivan Nova as well.

I can see dealing Nova, but Hughes is, at present anyway, the team’s third or fourth starter. And in a rotation that is depending on Andy Pettitte, depth is going to matter too, so it seems strange that they’d be willing to peddle both of them. And as we mentioned the other day, someone has to play outfield for the Yankees in 2013, so trading Granderson doesn’t make a ton of sense. Unless, that is, the Bombers are willing to punt this season for a rare New York rebuild.

I’m going to assume it’s mere chatter, as all teams listen to almost all offers that come their way.

  1. uyf1950 - Dec 6, 2012 at 11:08 AM

    I can see the Yankees moving Nova under the right circumstances. Hughes I think this year is far to important to the starting rotation. Plus Nova if he is moved would be under a teams control for 4 years including this year. BTW, don’t count out the Yankees potentially moving Granderson.

    • theskinsman - Dec 7, 2012 at 2:23 AM

      Carl Pavano is available. And I imagine he won’t be overpriced.

  2. deadrabbit79 - Dec 6, 2012 at 11:09 AM

    Rare rebuild? No way! Selling the team soon? Hmmmmmm

    • ezthinking - Dec 6, 2012 at 11:26 AM

      Unless an owner is desperate for money, you sign players to boast the team value.

      • pellypell - Dec 6, 2012 at 11:31 AM

        False. New owners like to put their fingerprints on their new team (seeL Dodgers), not buy a team locked into ugly contracts. The World knows the Yankees value, you don’t need to sign anyone to inflate it.

      • pellypell - Dec 6, 2012 at 11:31 AM

        False. New owners like to put their fingerprints on their new team (see: Dodgers), not buy a team locked into ugly contracts. The World knows the Yankees value, you don’t need to sign anyone to inflate it.

      • ezthinking - Dec 6, 2012 at 12:10 PM

        Pelly – The Dodgers’ ownership WAS desperate for money. Sooo….. your example was the exception.

      • ezthinking - Dec 6, 2012 at 12:15 PM

        And the Yankees have signed up $66 million for next year in re-upping Kuroda, Mo, Pettite, Cano and Granderson, only $4 mil was required on buyouts. For that money they could have signed probably about signed Hamilton, Grienke and kept Cano ($15 mil).

      • paperlions - Dec 6, 2012 at 12:49 PM

        Nah, that pretty much how it always works…go back and look at the history of teams going up for sale, if they do anything at all…it is dump payroll. SD and Houston being 2 other recent examples.

      • chadjones27 - Dec 6, 2012 at 12:51 PM

        It’s easier to find new ownership when your club is under the salary/ luxury tax. This way new ownership doesn’t have to fork out a bajillion dollars for the team, then pay a gazillion dollars extra to the luxury tax.
        BTW, those are actually amounts.

      • ezthinking - Dec 6, 2012 at 1:17 PM

        Houston true – Padres false. Padres payroll ’10 – $37.8; ’11 – $45.9; sale in mid-summer 2012 $55.6 in payroll.

    • anxovies - Dec 6, 2012 at 7:38 PM

      I doubt that the Steinbrenners are selling the Yankees. However, it is my understanding the holding company for the team, Yankee Global Enterprises, LLC, has several members who are not involved in the operation of the team, including George’s 2 daughters. Hal and/or Hank might be interested in buying out the daughters and other non-family members, but I don’t think that they want to sell to outsiders. Further, this would be a bad time to sell with the big extended contracts to aged veterans. My understanding is that the salary cap tax goes up every year you are over and the Yankees have been over since at least 1999. If they can keep under the salary cap for one year that purges the increased penalties and the penalties for going over are less for succeeding years.

  3. kindasporty - Dec 6, 2012 at 11:13 AM

    Maybe they could trade Granderson for Ian Kennedy?

    • sabathiawouldbegoodattheeighthtoo - Dec 6, 2012 at 11:59 AM

      Can they get Austin Jackson and Phil Coke thrown in there as well? :-(

  4. orangecisco - Dec 6, 2012 at 11:25 AM

    Why would they trade Nova under there new budget concerns? Hughes and a prospect for Sin-Soo Choo

  5. sabathiawouldbegoodattheeighthtoo - Dec 6, 2012 at 11:46 AM

    It all depends on what they get back, don’t it? I think every GM should listen to offers on every player. There COULD be a deal out there that would make sense to deal Mike Trout, or Evan Longoria. It would be a crazy deal, but since Vernon Wells was traded I don’t think anything is TOO crazy anymore.

  6. sabathiawouldbegoodattheeighthtoo - Dec 6, 2012 at 11:48 AM

    Granderson for Cliff Lee
    Nova and Hughes for Justin Upton

    screw the 2014 budget! Just put up a new billboard in RF to make up the difference.

  7. angrycorgi - Dec 6, 2012 at 11:55 AM

    The Yankees are listening to offers for Granderson, Hughes and Nova

    …crickets….

  8. willclarkgameface - Dec 6, 2012 at 12:00 PM

    I love watching the New York Yankees in a pickle. Makes me giggle.

    • tmarlin1221 - Dec 6, 2012 at 12:42 PM

      esp when they win the world series yearly while your team wins the off season championship trophy by may 1…

      • paperlions - Dec 6, 2012 at 12:53 PM

        Yeah, just look at all 1 of the WS the Yankees have won the last 12 years. They’ve only been in it twice the last decade…and they really aren’t getting any better. It really looks like they’ve spent too much time relying on $$ and have fallen behind other teams in other areas of development/assessment.

      • sabathiawouldbegoodattheeighthtoo - Dec 6, 2012 at 1:47 PM

        paperlions: only?

      • historiophiliac - Dec 6, 2012 at 3:05 PM

        I thoroughly enjoyed their performance in the 2012 post-season.

      • bozosforall - Dec 6, 2012 at 10:47 PM

        Don’t you mean 2 in the last 13 years, puppylapper? Funny how it is so easy to frame things to make them look worse than they really are. Not many teams can claim 2 titles in this century, the Yankees being one team that can.

      • theskinsman - Dec 7, 2012 at 2:00 AM

        Win the World Series yearly??? You really have to start watching live games and get off the YES network where the team never loses. Thanks for the laugh!

  9. dracko19 - Dec 6, 2012 at 12:14 PM

    Isn’t this year 5 for the Yankees being in the luxury tax, so they need to get under it to rest the 5 year clock or take a huge penalty?

  10. cackalackyank - Dec 6, 2012 at 12:26 PM

    I completely like the Granderson idea, the Nova idea not so much. Hughes I do not think would be a great trade prospect given the team control issue. I certainly do not see the depth in the NYY system to support trading both Hughes and Nova…frankly do not see the depth for either beeing traded unless there is at least a #4 coming back in the deal.

    • jwbiii - Dec 6, 2012 at 12:39 PM

      Yup. Hoping that both Betances and Banuelos can stay healthy and find the strike zone is not a good bet at this point.

  11. chadjones27 - Dec 6, 2012 at 12:54 PM

    I’m assuming that if the Yankees are listening to offers for Ivan or Hughes it means that one might get traded but not both. Can’t see them trading two pitchers.

  12. fanofevilempire - Dec 6, 2012 at 1:01 PM

    I don’t see why Craig ” can see dealing Nova” and keeping Hughs…………..

    Nova is a better pitcher than Hughs,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

  13. fanofevilempire - Dec 6, 2012 at 1:10 PM

    I don’t know where some of you are getting all this crap from……………………
    Yankees for sale……………………….
    Trading Hughs AND Nova- which is 20% of last years starting salary, seems crazy…………….
    even saw something about the Yankees and pickles……………”

    blah, blah, blad………………………

    Mike Francesa is saying the same things as I type this……………..

    some of you guys better tune in and forget Craig.

    • jwbiii - Dec 6, 2012 at 1:58 PM

      Or you could read the post instead of just headline.

      • deathmonkey41 - Dec 6, 2012 at 2:13 PM

        Or spell Hughes correctly at least once.

    • number42is1 - Dec 6, 2012 at 2:25 PM

      but……
      his use of….
      the……
      elipses……
      is rivaled by none……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
      …………………………………………………………………..
      ……………………………………..

      • jwbiii - Dec 6, 2012 at 6:23 PM

        May I recommend Celine’s Death on the Installment Plan?

      • purnellmeagrejr - Dec 7, 2012 at 7:53 AM

        celine is the Bible.

    • electstat - Dec 6, 2012 at 2:30 PM

      Because spelling Hughes correctly changes the argument.

      • deathmonkey41 - Dec 6, 2012 at 2:44 PM

        Just trying to help a fellow Yankees fan out, homeslice.

  14. ironcity6pak - Dec 6, 2012 at 1:38 PM

    Going to the pirates….

  15. slartibartfast4242 - Dec 6, 2012 at 1:40 PM

    Unless there is a new edict from Hank Steinbrenner forbidding Cashman to have any pitchers in the rotation under the age of 30, this does not make much sense. It’s not like they have pitching prospects ready to step in from the upper levels of minors.

    Then of course a deal would make sense depending upon what they can finagle out of another team.

    With all these rumors and signings as well as non-signings, It looks like the Yankees are suddenly stuck in the Bizarro World.

  16. djpostl - Dec 6, 2012 at 1:52 PM

    You assume they’re willing to trade them ALL. It could simply be once a deal is worked out for one, the others are off the block.

    I also don’t need to have it explained to me that a deal for Nova or Hughes would have to have arms in it or would be a companion deal with signing Jackson, Sanchez or Dempster.

  17. sportsnut101 - Dec 6, 2012 at 3:45 PM

    wow key is pitching n they wanna trade thier pitching who have been ok

    grandy man im ok with moving yes he hits homeruns when no1 is onbase

    but his average is awful

    • anxovies - Dec 6, 2012 at 7:43 PM

      OK? Nova exploded after the 4th inning. Hughes looked like he got better so he probably stays. Maybe somebody will take Nova as a project and give us a utility player.

  18. jayscarpa - Dec 6, 2012 at 3:59 PM

    Nova won’t get them anything after last year’s meltdown.

    Hughes, on the other hand, is arbitration eligible 2013 and a FA 2014. If he does well this year his arbitration money is going to be a lot, exactly when the Yankees can’t spend a lot. Also his trade value goes down as his salary goes up. I can see them moving him.

  19. jonconn - Dec 6, 2012 at 4:28 PM

    Too many strikeouts. Good fielder but we need a more consistent hitter ! Trade him.

    • jayscarpa - Dec 6, 2012 at 4:37 PM

      He’s a lousy fielder. He looks like a dog chasing a frisbee in CF. If he stays he moves to a corner and Gardner plays CF.

      • purnellmeagrejr - Dec 7, 2012 at 7:56 AM

        great line “like a dog chasing a frisbee in CF. Just think if you did color on a network broadcast and said that, You’d have to publicly apologize. Funny phrase. I always enjoy the wit of people commmenting on sports more than I do that of politicoes.

  20. brandedthefirst - Dec 6, 2012 at 5:11 PM

    willclarkgameface
    Dec 6, 2012, 12:00 PM EST
    I love watching the New York Yankees in a pickle. Makes me giggle.

    Not much to giggle about cause I don’t see any pickle , jam, or any other kind of food stuffs?

  21. maritime85 - Dec 7, 2012 at 11:12 AM

    hughes stinks but hed be great on another team. better then ian kennedy

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Cubs shore up rotation with Jon Lester
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. J. Kang (2771)
  2. W. Myers (2530)
  3. D. Ross (2181)
  4. C. McGehee (2115)
  5. W. Middlebrooks (1974)
  1. J. Shields (1874)
  2. D. Haren (1865)
  3. T. Tulowitzki (1849)
  4. J. Upton (1834)
  5. M. Scutaro (1788)