FanHouse Randy Levine

NEW YORK -- Joe Torre's name is on the book, but it's a fair estimate not even one-fourth of the words are actually his. He says he's read it six times, perusing line for line, scanning chapters for quotes or anecdotes that have caused so much fuss. It is clear the New York Yankees, Torre's former employer, aren't pleased with the book -- Torre's book -- and there is a decent chance their relationship is forever stained.

And yet, here is Torre, calmly navigating another hot-stove controversy the way he did for 12 always memorable, sometimes controversial seasons as manager of the Yankees. Taking refuge from a snowstorm building steam outside, Torre brushes a few icy flakes from his shoulder and tells me he "wouldn't change a thing."

Is Brian Cashman on the hot seat in New York? It may seem that way, at least if you read between the lines of yesterday's press conference to introduce Joe Girardi as the team's next manager. From beat reporter Peter Abraham in his LoHud Yankees Blog:

Other than Brian Cashman, the only high-ranking team official at the press conference today was chief operating officer Lonn Trost, who has almost no say in baseball decisions.

No Randy Levine. No Hank Steinbrenner. No Hal Steinbrenner. Not even Felix Lopez.

Was there a message being sent that Brian Cashman is out on a limb with his hand-picked manager?

This doesn't completely surprise me; I speculated that the Steinbrenner family would hold Cashman personally responsible for the success or failure of the next manager when Hank Steinbrenner made a point of saying that Cashman would make the decision. Are we reading too much into this? I don't think so; it's routine for some of those guys to appear at a run-of-the-mill free agent signing, but they can't be there when the team is introducing a new manager for the first time in 12 years?

When asked whether the Yankees would exercise their 2008 option for Bobby Abreu, Cashman gave another sign he's walking on egg shells, simply saying, "I want to talk to the Steinbrenners one more time." Not exactly brimming with confidence, eh? Yes, there's a good chance I'm reading too much into that ... but there's also a good chance I'm not.

Will Leitch is used to disrupting the mainstream media from afar; now, he's infiltrated their ranks. Writing an article about Alex Rodriguez's contract situation for New York Magazine, Leitch included what seems to be a poorly sourced throw-away line about alleged talks agent Scott Boras has had with one of the prospective ownership groups interested in the Cubs:

The source says Boras has already been in touch with that group about the possibility of a contract that could reach $30 million a year over the next ten years while deferring a certain portion of money toward an eventual stake in the franchise.

In an article that's 2,100 words long, that one sentence is what caught everybody's attention. (Quick aside: surprised that it was Leitch who wrote the article? If you've only read ESPN's coverage of the flap, there's no way you would've known -- the World Wide Leader seems to have gone out of its way to avoid crediting the article as anything but "from New York Magazine," perhaps nervous of the fact that naming Leitch might appear like they're jumping at a chance to discredit a constant thorn in their side. Or, maybe they just didn't notice, I don't know ...)

Boras denied the report, and Yankees president Randy Levine was so upset about it that he ran to Bud Selig to confirm that it wouldn't even be legal. And why wouldn't such a deal be kosher?

One of the biggest reasons that the Yankees have been able to sustain the game's largest payroll for so many reasons has been the fact that the team is partial owners of the their own cable channel, the YES Network. But how much longer will the team sit on that pot of gold? From Fortune:

The highest-rated regional sports network in the country and the cable home of the Yankees and the NBA New Jersey Nets, YES is jointly owned by the Yankees, investment bank Goldman Sachs & Co., and former Nets owner Ray Chambers. Goldman and Chambers would like to cash out, YES and Yankees insiders say, and one source says to expect a deal by summer's end. Some possible bidders: Cablevision, Comcast, News Corp. and Verizon.

Publicly, Yankees and YES officials are noncommittal. "Absolutely not," Yankees president Randy Levine replies when asked whether YES is for sale - though not before acknowledging some "testing of the market." Gerry Cardinale, a Goldman managing director and YES board member, is more forthcoming, conceding that YES is in fact being shopped. "We're testing the waters with a limited universe of quality buyers," says Cardinale. "We would consider selling only if we receive a full and fair price."

And what might a "full and fair" price be? Try a cool $3 billion to $3.5 billion. At that price, one could argue that the true gem of the Yankees business empire isn't the team itself but YES.

Given rumors of George Steinbrenner's declining health, one has to wonder if the potential sale of the YES Network indicates that the Steinbrenner family is preparing to put the Yankees on the open market. But Hal Steinbrenner, George's son who has taken on a larger role within the team this year, emphatically denied that suggestion to Fortune. Considering the on-going construction of the team's new $1.2 billion stadium in Manhattan, it's not surprising at all if the family really is in this for the long-haul.

I'm an unabashed Peter Gammons fan, and I don't think I'm alone. But is he letting personal politics taint his role of an independent journalist? That's what Bob Raissman of the New York Daily News suggests after hearing Gammons say the following in response to a question about Joe Torre's fate during ESPN's Sunday Night Baseball:

"There are some problems (for Torre). Randy Levine, the club president who apparently is back in power, is no Joe Torre fan," Gammons said. "There is no question there is pressure coming from George Steinbrenner and some other people in the organization who question Joe Torre despite his resume of remarkable achievement."

Fair enough, right? But for those familiar with the situation (and I'm not, I'm taking Raissman's word on this one ...), Gammons' inclusion of Levine was surprising:

Bringing Levine into the equation is curious. Or is it? In recent years Levine's role with the Yankees has been clearly spelled out. He is in charge of the business side, so it must have been surprising for him to hear he is back in power.

It really does not matter what Levine thinks of Torre. Even in Steinbrenner's weakened state, he - or the family member running the Yankees that particular day - is not going to place an urgent call to Levine and get him involved in pure baseball decisions.

So why would Gammons throw out his name? Was he just unaware of Levine's true role on the team, or was there something else behind it? Raissman thinks it may have been the latter:

For many years - and this is not a well-kept secret - there has been animosity between Levine and Gammons. They don't speak. The bad blood came as a result of Levine taking issue with a Gammons report about the Yankees acquiring a player for major dough. Levine called an ESPN executive directly, telling him Gammons' report was not accurate.

Needless to say, Gammons was not thrilled about this.

It may not be a well-kept secret among media types, but I'm assuming the casual fan watching the telecast was clueless. So was Gammons simply reporting the truth or taking advantage of an opportunity to hang Levine out to dry? We probably won't ever know, and as someone who admittedly eats up most of what Gammons has to say, that's at least a little troubling.