Yankees demote Phelps to Single-A to activate D-Rob

David Robertson is finally coming back today, but it is at the expense of David Phelps who will be sent to Single-A to be stretched out before returning to the Triple-A rotation, the Yankees announced today.

I’m not a big fan of this move, but I can see why they would go in this direction. Freddy Garcia has been downright awful for the Yankees this year and should be the one to go. The Yankees are a better team with Phelps on the roster than Garcia. But the reason they are doing it is because this gives them an extra option and it also puts Phelps back in a rotation.

The thing is, the Yankees can stash Phelps in the minors and they can’t do that with Garcia. So this gives them an extra option. Don’t forget they have to pay him the rest of his $4 million deal. Might as well have the guy at least mop up and maybe some NL team will want him at the deadline for nothing but salary relief.

Getting Phelps back into the rotation, even if it is in the minors, is good because he’ll be stretched out again. Then in the event the Yankees have an injury to their rotation it will be Phelps who will be the first called on and there will be no temptation to use Garcia in that spot because of experience.

About Rob Abruzzese

Rob Abruzzese created Bronx Baseball Daily in 2008 just before graduating from Brooklyn College. He currently serves BBD as its editor and works as a reporter at the Brooklyn Daily Eagle. Follow Rob on Twitter @RobAbruzzese.
This entry was posted in Yankees News and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

18 Responses to Yankees demote Phelps to Single-A to activate D-Rob

  1. Mike Sommer says:

    Phelps needs the work. He hasn't pitched since June 2nd.

    • Matt_DC says:

      I really like Phelps. With that movement on his two-seam fastball, he could be a tough middle reliever if not at 4-5 starter. After his good April I was hoping he was the next Ramiro Mendoza. I do hope to see him back in the Bronx.

  2. Hotdog says:

    I'm not convinced that Phelps has much of a career in pinstripes waiting for him. He's more likely to be the odd man out as part of a trade.

  3. Tanned Tom says:

    Maybe it makes sense, but it sucks for Phelps. I'm not at all of the idea that pitching to A ball kids will help when he has to pitch to David Ortiz in the 8th inning, but then I guess they're keeping him slotted as a starter. With a rotation for 2013 of Sabathia, Pettitte, Pineda, Hughes, and Nova, Phelps might indeed be trade bait.
    If I'm Cashman I definitely try to move Garcia, now or at the trading deadline. Getting Robertson back is huge, of course.

    • Fred says:

      I hate to be this guy, and I doubt it will go down this way, but Pettitte isn't technically signed for 2013, AFAIK. Although he's pitching extremely well right now, you can't rule out the possibility of him hanging em up again after this season. If that's the case, Phelps could be an important piece going forward, and honestly I think he has the potential to be a solid middle rotation guy in the majors

  4. spk says:

    he got experience, proved he can handle himself and hopefully saw what he must do to improve a la nova last year. the killer b's aren't doing anything so his value going forward as a starter is greater than it was in the beginning of the year. and the bullpen doesn't NEED him the way the way they need starter insurance

  5. clarence says:

    Trade away another kennedy Yankees.

  6. Tanned Tom says:

    Speaking of which, the Granderson trade is typical of Cashman, trade away 2 young players for an established one. Not saying Granderson hasn't been a good player, but Kennedy and Jackson are all-star caliber, young, and cheap. All in all a terrible trade.

    • Mike Sommer says:

      Good God. The guy has 62 HR since the beginning of 2011 and it's not enough for you to pine for Kennedy and Jackson? What more do you want from Granderson? Or, for that matter, Cashman? You were not getting Granderson for nothing? It was a trade that benefitted ALL parties.

      • Tanned Tom says:

        I think I did write that Granderson's been a good player. In fact he's been better than I thought possible. But I still feel giving up 2 all-stars for 1 is a questionable deal.

        • Mike Sommer says:

          I still think you are being highly unreasonable.

          • Tanned Tom says:

            I know you do, Mike. But, honestly, anyone in favor of the deal should be in the position of justifying it. Kennedy has, put up 2 CY caliber years, and Jackson is a .300 hitter with a great glove. Tell me why Granderson is worth more than the 2 of them put together.

  7. Mike Sommer says:

    There's no guarantee either would have made it in NY, first of all. It's easier for a young talent, especially one with hype, to make it elsewhere, away from the scrutiny that NY provides. Detroit and Arizona provided that for Kennedy and Jackson. I will start with Kennedy. He has NOT put up two CYA years, but one. Last year he was 21-4. In 2010, he was 9-10, 3.80. Currently he is 5-7, 4.13. So take away the 21-4 of last year, and he is 14-17, with an ERA in the NL West. Yup, the SAME NL West that was so weak when people criticized getting Kuroda when they said that Kuroda and his 3.45 career ERA would not survive in the AL East (Kuroda, at 6-6, 3.43, has done fine. The ERA is behind only Pettitte and so far, better than CC). Kennedy also made his own bed as far as getting bounced from NY. Go to this link: http://newyork.yankees.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?y

  8. Mike Sommer says:

    (continued) It may be a reminder. After that, who knows? Cashman, Girardi or Kennedy's own teammates may have decided right then and there that Kennedy had to go. He did not go… not immediately. But he only pitched in one game for the Yankees after that. One. It very well could be that people like Pettitte, A-Rod, Jeter, Mussina or others urged Cashman to dump him after that. We'll never know. But outside of the 21-4, 2.88, Kennedy is 14-17, 3.91—not terrible, but not great in that "weak" NL West. I have nothing against Kennedy, and wish he'd have made it in NY. But maybe there was something more to getting rid of him. As for A-Jax, I also was disappointed that he couldn't be a Yankee. I saw him a few times up in Moosic (SWB's home when they have a home), for Moosic is about a 75 minute drive for me.

  9. Mike Sommer says:

    (continued) It appears as if Jackson may—may—make his first all-star appearance this year. He had a decent enough rookie year in 2010, but without power and with 170 strikeouts to lead the league. Granderson also strikes out a lot, but provides power, and also the speed Jackson does (IF the Yanks LET him steal. Granderson had 25 SB last year, three now. Jackson had 22 SB last year). Despite an AL leading 11 triples last year, Jackson hit .249. Meanwhile, last year Granderson led the majors in runs scored, the AL in RBI, finished 4th in the MVP balloting, and hit 41 HR. Jackson is having a fine year right now. Granderson is on a pace for 52 HR. So really, Kennedy has had one good year so far, Jackson is in his good year, while Granderson had last year and this year. You aren't getting Granderson for nothing. He's delivered. The other two may have fine careers. I don't look at the deal as anyone rooking anyone else. Everyone got what they wanted and desired.

  10. Mike Sommer says:

    (continued, sorry, it wouldn't take unless…) You were not getting an established star like Granderson for one unproven youngster. It took two, because at the time you didn't know if either would pan out. So far Kennedy has put up ONE decent year. Jackson is hitting .300 NOW, and is at .278 for his career, not .300. I don't know how the two will pan out. No one does. I wish them the best, as I do Curtis. But I feel as if the Yanks got fully their money's worth since Kennedy has had one good year, and Jackson so far 65 games or so of a good year. Nothing more than that. Meanwhile, Granderson has had one full MVP caliber year, and so far would probably be top-5 MVP again.

    • Tanned Tom says:

      A much better trade, imo, is the Pineda-Montero trade. Montero had no natural position with the Yanks, Noesi projects as a 5th starter or reliever, whereas Pineda projects to a legitimate 2nd or 3rd starter (if he recovers from the surgery) and Campos seems to have an even higher ceiling, with some scouts thinking he has top of the rotation potential.
      Another ramification of the Granderson deal is that with the new CBA coming for 2014, the team is likely to part ways with Nick Swisher over payroll cost. So for 2013 the Yankees will have Granderson, but they could have had Swisher, Kennedy and Jackson for roughly the same cost. I'm just saying.

  11. Tanned Tom says:

    First let me thank you for a well reasoned and informed response.
    I agree with your assessment regarding Granderson's performance, although it should also be remembered that he was trending downward when the Yanks acquired him and his resurgence was not something that could have been counted on. I even agree with your judgment of Jackson and Kennedy. A GM's job when it comes to trades, or free agent signings, is to read future production. Perhaps you are right that Jackson,and especially Kennedy, have prospered in a way they could not have in NY. I don't know. But we do know that they have done fairly well since the trade. My point is this trade will sting for years if Jackson and Kennedy continue to play well, as getting one very good player for two good starters (who will cost possibly less than 50% between them) if just the sort of deal that depletes a teams farm system, which should be a concern for an old team like NY.

Comments are closed.