You know the top-tier names. Every Yankees fan has rolled them around in their smooth brain curves daily, ever since the team missed out on Yoshinobu Yamamoto.

Every one of them has warts. Every one of them would be an improvement on the current back of the rotation. Every one of them seems doubtful to be a Yankee, at best. Blake Snell. Jordan Montgomery. Corbin Burnes. Dylan Cease. Shane Bieber. Shōta Imanaga. Jesus Luzardo. Edward Cabrera. (Sigh) Marcus Stroman.

Without one of these “big-ish” names in pinstripes, it will be tough for the Yankees to say they sniffed around the high-end pitching market and succeeded this offseason. But making any of the above names the center piece of your offseason — especially at elevated prices — could backfire just as easily as it could make you a king. And, based on Brian Cashman’s recent attempts to acquire pitching, whichever one he chooses will probably backfire.

So, what if Cashman shops in the lower tier? Frankie Montas and Luis Severino both received higher guarantees than anyone imagined they would, but there are still a few intriguing names available on one-to-two-year deals for under $30 million. There’s no such thing as a bad one-year deal, but a pitcher really has to stink to make a two-year deal look horrendous, too.

We liked Sean Manaea and his new sweeper. Everyone liked Sean Manaea and his new sweeper. Don’t let anyone get hipster cred for suggesting they were one of the very few people to like Manaea’s new arsenal. The contrarian take — that it doesn’t much matter/Manaea is still a mid-ceiling, 120-inning guy — would actually be the one that deserves credit, if 2024 doesn’t go his (and the Mets’) way.

Still, allow us to say that, although Manaea and his new sweeper probably represented the most appealing fit at this price level, there are still options on the Yankees’ table.

3 (relatively cheap) short-term pitching contracts Yankees can still sign in 2024

Michael Lorenzen

If you believe in FanGraphs’ rankings of the Yankees’ current rotation depth chart, this starting staff — as constructed — ranks in the top half of the league. That’s without factoring in a return to Cy Young form for Carlos Rodón (instead of a moderate bounce back), a large chunk of innings from Luis Gil (they projected just 18), and Will Warren’s potential breakout (New York was high on him for a reason).

Warren could be quite good in 2024, but relying on him to be your fifth starter rather than being pleasantly surprised by his efforts, feels foolish. That’s where an arm like Michael Lorenzen comes in.

Lorenzen, who threw a no-hitter in Philadelphia last summer, would just have to clear the bar of giving fans more comfort than Warren on Opening Day, then would have to be good for 100-130 solid-to-good innings over the course of the year. His command and four-seam fastball both remain in Savant’s top percentiles, though he doesn’t exactly follow Matt Blake’s guidelines for acquisition (top-tier changeup, avoiding barrels).

Lorenzen’s theoretical best year probably looks a lot like 2023: All-Star highs, significant lows (being yanked from the staff after tiring out before October), grit, tenacity, and occasional flashes of greatness. If the Yankees have the chance to secure 130 good innings for $13-14 million AAV for two years, they should do so. Where’s Lorenzen’s market right now?

James Paxton Reunion

If he’s (somehow) too expensive for the Red Sox, maybe he’d be more viable in the Bronx?

Man, it’s … it’s a real bummer that the Yankees’ offseason has fallen from dreams of Yamamoto to this particular bin, but the reality is they need depth, featuring experience and moderate upside. Montgomery would fill every need on that list, as long as he doesn’t command a contract between $160-175 million … but he probably will, and wants to go back to Texas! Snell would be a viable upside play, but his contract is also likely to be prohibitively expensive (or, at least, likely to reach the point where even a layperson would feel awkward handing it out). That’s how you arrive at a place like Paxton, and how you can convince yourself that $15-16 million for a lot of strikeouts, 100 innings, and a 3.94 ERA wouldn’t be so bad after all.

Paxton’s been a Yankee before. He was comfortably solid here. He fought back from year-robbing injuries to look like a Comeback Player of the Year candidate in Boston last season before falling off as the season dragged on (where have we heard that before?).

At Fenway Park, hardly a pitchers’ paradise, he somehow posted a 3.16 ERA in eight starts, striking out 49 men in 42.2 innings. In 10 first-half starts, he posted a 2.73 ERA and .201 BAA with 64 Ks in 56 innings. Even if Paxton ceased being effective as soon as the second-half bell tolled, there is no such thing as a bad one-year deal, especially if it comes with 64 valuable first-half innings.

“If only he could stay healthy…” isn’t a valid caveat here. We already know that he won’t. The only question is how the Yankees should value his pre-injury contributions, and that number changes depending on whether or not they’re actually able to nab a top-tier arm.

Hyun-Jin Ryu

Another left-hander, and this time, a 36-year-old option. Less than ideal. But Ryu was a Cy Young-caliber arm when he arrived in Toronto prior to the 2020 season, a viable innings eater in 2021 (169 innings, 4.37 ERA/4.02 FIP), and posted fourth starter numbers in 2023 after returning from long-term injury (3.46 ERA with a sketch 4.91 FIP in 52 innings).

His ability to miss bats might be evaporating as the years pile up, but if all the Yankees require is someone wily (and someone who’s already recovered from recent Tommy John surgery), Ryu might be a solid bet to put up one (final?) healthy season.

There was an indicator last week that, following the Mariners and Giants’ Robbie Ray trade, the Yankees could similarly look for someone else’s distressed asset to help flesh out their rotation depth. Ryu would qualify as a recently distressed asset from within the division, but comes with the added benefit of … no longer being tied down, not requiring a multi-year commitment, and not costing any prospect capital. This is an imperfect fit in an imperfect offseason — but if the Mets were reportedly eyeing him before settling on Manaea, why not?