593 replies to this topic

[Sille Skrub]

Alright. We're gonna try this again.

The last Johan Santana thread was becoming an embarassment to SoSH. As the premiere sports messageboard on the internet™, we've always prided ourselves on our signal-to-noise ratio. I know almost everyone here is wicked excited at the prospect of Johan Santana pitching for the Red Sox next season, but let's try and keep the discourse respectable.

Here are some groundrules for the all-new official "noise-free" (heh, we'll see) Johan Santana discussion thread:
(aka the A.N.O.N.F.J.S.D.T)

1) The main board is not a chatroom. We have one for a reason and we also have P&G for posters like me.
2) Only post in this thread if you are bringing something new to the table. Repeating the same stale points (**cough** dcmissle **cough**) only wastes everyone's time. I hardly ever have anything worthwhile to add, so I don't post.
3) Please read the thread (or at least the previous few pages) before posting here. There is no need to repeat stuff that has already been said.
4) We have two ears and one mouth. Please ignore how many arms we have in this analogy.
5) Megathreads are evil and do nothing but please the terrorists. When in doubt, please start a new thread. Seriously.
6) For Corsi and everyone else, I am starting an official "Johan Santana New News only" thread after this one. For the slow, please use it to post new news only. I expect it not to have that many posts per day.
7) There is a Santana thread in the Yankees forum for any Yankee fans who wish to post 100x about how Phil Hughes won't be included in this deal.
8) Empty barrels make the most noise.
9) Consider yourself warned. The mods and dopes are going to be deleting posts, warning via PM, and suspending (and potentially banning) members who continue to add to the noise.

I believe in you guys. I believe you can fly. I believe you can touch the sky.

Deep breaths, everyone.

[DJnVa]

I think Sille scared everyone away, but I'll give it a whirl.

With the news that the Yankees have apparently decided to add Phillip Hughes to their offer, we have to assume that puts the Yankees back as the front-runners. That means, I would think, that there are now some internal discussions in Boston before the Winter Meetings start on whether or not the Sox will add Jacoby Ellsbury to the offer. If they do, I think they get Santana, otherwise the Twins pull the trigger now with NY.

Here's why I think they do it:

Even though Ellsbury took over CF late in the postseason and performed, the Sox were able to win 96 games with Coco Crisp playing defense at an all-world level and offense at an all-Pony League level. Ellsbury is the cost of the upgrade from Lester in the rotation to Santana.

Should the Sox decide not to add Ellsbury to the deal, I think Crisp is gone before the end of the Winter Meetings. (I assume the Twins *may* put a deadline on the Sox now). Despite Theo's statements about how having 2 good CF'ers on the team can work, Crisp is going to be a wanted man.

[E5 Yaz]

I see DJ's points, and I respectfully disagree.

I simply don't believe management will see Santana being so imperative that they blow up their entire salary structure to get him, in addition to relinquishing four players. While Beckett might be in position to request "Santana money" when his deal expires, the Red Sox would be better off in terms of risk/reward to give it to him then rather than soon after acquiring Santana.

(I also suspect that, if the Hughes report is accurate and the Sox do decide to offer Ellsbury, they'll insist on it being a three-player package as the Yankees have put out.)

I suspect that the Red Sox will check into Haren, Bedard and/or Peavy, or maybe wait a year until Sabathia hits the market.

[dcmissle]

Well I sure as hell wasn't going to be the first one in. A few thoughts.

1. The NY Daily News account couples "we're offering Hughes" with "Santana really prefers to play in NY." If this is just the Yanks speaking through Pravda, that's one thing. If the "sources" include someone speaking for Santana, that's another. This doesn't happen without an extension, and his approach might be, "It's 6 x 25, and don't bother bringing your sharp pencils because you're not my #1 choice." That would have to give the RS pause.

2. That said, the offer could be sweeted by swapping in Ellsbury for Coco, or Buchholz for Lester, perhaps while dropping the 4th prospect as Yaz suggests. Having offered up Hughes, does anyone think the Yanks would quit?

3. Bedard would be hugely difficult and expensive. The Os have had it up to their eyeballs with Sox fans taking over Camden, and bitter memories still linger from over Mussina in pinstripes. They would not be pleased facing him 4 to 5 times every year. Haren? I've seen in one thread here that Beane would have to be blown away -- Buchholz and Ellsbury. Peavy, I don't know.

[GriffinDoerr]

Well I sure as hell wasn't going to be the first one in. A few thoughts.

1. The NY Daily News account couples "we're offering Hughes" with "Santana really prefers to play in NY." If this is just the Yanks speaking through Pravda, that's one thing. If the "sources" include someone speaking for Santana, that's another. This doesn't happen without an extension, and his approach might be, "It's 6 x 25, and don't bother bringing your sharp pencils because you're not my #1 choice." That would have to give the RS pause.

2. That said, the offer could be sweeted by swapping in Ellsbury for Coco, or Buchholz for Lester, perhaps while dropping the 4th prospect as Yaz suggests. Having offered up Hughes, does anyone think the Yanks would quit?

3. Bedard would be hugely difficult and expensive. The Os have had it up to their eyeballs with Sox fans taking over Camden, and bitter memories still linger from over Mussina in pinstripes. They would not be pleased facing him 4 to 5 times every year. Haren? I've seen in one thread here that Beane would have to be blown away -- Buchholz and Ellsbury. Peavy, I don't know.

As a lefty, it makes sense for Santana to prefer pitching in Yankee Stadium rather than Fenway. I have no clue about the size of his ego, but if he wants to be the No. ! guy, New York also makes sense. Plus, New York of course is in the best position to offer him a ridiculously huge contract.

I'm somewhat curious as to why Haren and Bedard are being mentioned as trade bait for the Red Sox. I can understand making a play for Santana, who is a singular talent. But this is a Red Sox team that's actually discussing a six-man starting rotation. Why would they make that trade? I thought the greater need was in the bullpen?

[satyadaimoku]

With the news that the Yankees have apparently decided to add Phillip Hughes to their offer, we have to assume that puts the Yankees back as the front-runners. That means, I would think, that there are now some internal discussions in Boston before the Winter Meetings start on whether or not the Sox will add Jacoby Ellsbury to the offer. If they do, I think they get Santana, otherwise the Twins pull the trigger now with NY.

You think? I dunno. If I'm Minnesota, I like Hughes a lot more than Ellsbury. A good fielding, decent offensive center fielder / leadoff hitter is a nice piece to have, but if I'm trading my franchise player, I want a prospect with franchise player upside, and I don't see that with Ellsbury. I suppose it depends on how much better Minnesota thinks of our supplemental players, but if I were the Twins, once the Yankees have added Hughes, the Sox would need to add Buchholz to beat it.

I bet you anything that the Twins leaked the rumor that the Red Sox were in the lead for Santana in order to get the Yankees to include Hughes, and now that they have, the Yankees are going to make the move.

[George from Maine]

Part of any Santana trade is the issue of what it is going to take to sign him. Zito got $18 million a year for 7 years. Santana is going to get more than that, though the $25 million for 6 years that has been suggested seems unlikely.

[Grubbery]

You think? I dunno. If I'm Minnesota, I like Hughes a lot more than Ellsbury. A good fielding, decent offensive center fielder / leadoff hitter is a nice piece to have, but if I'm trading my franchise player, I want a prospect with franchise player upside, and I don't see that with Ellsbury. I suppose it depends on how much better Minnesota thinks of our supplemental players, but if I were the Twins, once the Yankees have added Hughes, the Sox would need to add Buchholz to beat it.

I bet you anything that the Twins leaked the rumor that the Red Sox were in the lead for Santana in order to get the Yankees to include Hughes, and now that they have, the Yankees are going to make the move.

I think you have to consider the combination of players coming to the Twins. In an MFY deal, the Twins have Melky to be their everyday CF. Ellsbury fills the CF need more admirably, and you still get a strong prospect in Lester (though obviously not the equal to Hughes). I don't think it's a slam dunk for the Sox if Jacoby's in the mix, but I think you can argue the relative trade value of the combined Lester + Ellsbury vs. Hughes + Melky would give the Twins pause.

[67WasBest]

I didn't see this discussed anywhere in the mega thread and if it was I apologize for being redundant.

I think we are looking at the Ellsbury/Lester vs Hughes/Cabrera strictly from a baseball perspective. As such we see the Hughes / Cabrera tandem as a greater value on the field. I'm not so sure the Twins are looking at the options through the same lens. I offer the following, not as a reason to make the trade, just as a possible reason why Ellsbury is so desired by the Twins.

Ellsbury, as a Native American, may open an untapped portion of the fanbase for the Twins. The Native American population in New England is only slightly above 40,000, but it is over 200,000 in the 5 state Twins market:

MN - 54,967
WI - 47,228
SD - 62,283
ND - 31,329
IO - 8,989

With the difference in onfield skills / cost not that significant, this may well be what is driving the Twins to covet Ellsbury as their primary target. I know he is Navajo and not from a plains tribe, but I can't see that being a deterent to a marketing campaign geared toward this ethnic group.

[Vermonter At Large]

I think you have to consider the combination of players coming to the Twins. In an MFY deal, the Twins have Melky to be their everyday CF. Ellsbury fills the CF need more admirably, and you still get a strong prospect in Lester (though obviously not the equal to Hughes). I don't think it's a slam dunk for the Sox if Jacoby's in the mix, but I think you can argue the relative trade value of the combined Lester + Ellsbury vs. Hughes + Melky would give the Twins pause.

While Hughes is as close to replacing Santana as the Twins can probably get with a prospect, I really question the inclusion of Melky in this deal. Were I the Twins, I'd be looking to include Cano, who is much better in relation to his peers at his position, and looking for a CF elsewhere (perhaps a seperate trade for Crisp, involving Neshek as the principle). I just don't think Melky is better than replacement level - especially outside the Toilet.

[Rooster Crows]

Well I sure as hell wasn't going to be the first one in. A few thoughts.

1. The NY Daily News account couples "we're offering Hughes" with "Santana really prefers to play in NY." If this is just the Yanks speaking through Pravda, that's one thing. If the "sources" include someone speaking for Santana, that's another. This doesn't happen without an extension, and his approach might be, "It's 6 x 25, and don't bother bringing your sharp pencils because you're not my #1 choice." That would have to give the RS pause.

Assuming this is the reference

So the Yankees loom as favorites, according to sources, partly because Santana, who has a no-trade clause in his contract, wants to play for them. Former Twins center fielder Torii Hunter, who recently signed with the Angels, has been telling people since last year that Santana would love to play for the Yankees.

from This Article

I think they may have taken Hunter's comments out of context (deliberately for their purposes, or otherwise), and that he wasn't suggesting that Santana had a preference for NY OVER Boston, or even a preference for NY, simply that it is a place he would love to play. Hunter recently did an interview with ESPN, which is referenced in one of the many Sanata threads, and quoted in this Silverman article in Herald, as follows:

Center fielder Torii Hunter, a former teammate of Santana’s who recently agreed to a deal with the Angels, had interesting comments on ESPN Radio about the possible destination for Santana should he waive his full no-trade clause.
“I never heard him say anything Boston, you know, I never heard that he wanted to play in Boston, but, you know, (former Twin) David Ortiz [stats] is over there - we all came up together, and he and David Ortiz, they act the fool in the clubhouse,” said Hunter. “They’re funny, man. They crack jokes, they love each other, so, it could be true.
“It could be possible that he could end up in Boston, but at the same time, I heard him say something about New York a couple times. He would love to play in New York. But maybe he didn’t know that Boston really had interest in him. You never know.”

It seems to me that this is just wishful thinking by the News, and there is nothing to suggest there is a strong enough preference, or even any preference, by Santana of Yanks over Sox to make a difference in the final outcome. Indeed, as has been noted in other threads, Ortiz might swing it the other way. In my view, as between NY and Boston, it will simply come down to who offers the best package, of course.

Edited by Rooster Crows, 01 December 2007 - 07:27 AM.

[AlNipper49]

Well I sure as hell wasn't going to be the first one in. A few thoughts.

1. The NY Daily News account couples "we're offering Hughes" with "Santana really prefers to play in NY." If this is just the Yanks speaking through Pravda, that's one thing. If the "sources" include someone speaking for Santana, that's another. This doesn't happen without an extension, and his approach might be, "It's 6 x 25, and don't bother bringing your sharp pencils because you're not my #1 choice." That would have to give the RS pause.

2. That said, the offer could be sweeted by swapping in Ellsbury for Coco, or Buchholz for Lester, perhaps while dropping the 4th prospect as Yaz suggests. Having offered up Hughes, does anyone think the Yanks would quit?

3. Bedard would be hugely difficult and expensive. The Os have had it up to their eyeballs with Sox fans taking over Camden, and bitter memories still linger from over Mussina in pinstripes. They would not be pleased facing him 4 to 5 times every year. Haren? I've seen in one thread here that Beane would have to be blown away -- Buchholz and Ellsbury. Peavy, I don't know.

Stop stop stop storpoeter upoerwt stop stop stop stop st op stop stop stop stop stop stop stop stop posrp stop stop stop please stop. PLEASE FUCKING STOP THE PAIN

[OCD SS]

While Hughes is as close to replacing Santana as the Twins can probably get with a prospect, I really question the inclusion of Melky in this deal. Were I the Twins, I'd be looking to include Cano, who is much better in relation to his peers at his position, and looking for a CF elsewhere (perhaps a seperate trade for Crisp, involving Neshek as the principle). I just don't think Melky is better than replacement level - especially outside the Toilet.

I think this is a pretty important point. While I don't think that the Yankees will give up Cano, the current reports say that with the inclusion of Hughes, the Yankees are pulling back on the number of prospects that they are willing to add, but they are not pulling their starting CFer out of the deal to include a prospect in his place. Set aside what the Twins are demanding for a moment (just a moment) and look at this from the perspective of "does this trade hurt?"

Melky Cabrera is pretty much the Ian Kennedy of the Twins CF options.

He's a nice little player, but without any real upside, and not someone you really build the deal around. If he left, would any Yankee fans even notice he was gone, but for having to retire their "Got Melk?" t-shirts? The vibe I get from the Yankee fans who are posters here is that Tabata, or Austin Jackson would be missed more. Horne would be missed more. Heck, probably even Ian Kennedy would be missed more. If Melky goes in a trade, the Yankees will either slide Damon back to CF and unclog their LF/DH /1B logjam or sign Rowand or Jones. Other than the money, it's pretty painless.

As much as we're aware of how bad Melky is in CF, I can't believe this has escaped the Twins. They probably have a very good idea of what it will take to get Coco outside of a Santana trade. If that is close to palatable then the Twins should instead be trying to get a package of Hughes + Horne/Tabata/Jackson/ect rather than worrying about finding a middling CFer on a cheap deal. If the Twins really want to win right away, they should be trying to get a better CFer, and if they're ignoring '08 to aim at the long term they should be trying to get better prospects for Santana. If it's only about the money they can get Corey Patterson or Wily Taveras to play CF.

This is where Ellsbury comes in. Assuming the back end can be matched by either team, this is why an Ellsbury + Lester package would seem (to me at least) to equal or trump a Hughes + Melky package. Yes, Hughes has more upside than Lester, but the Twins and others seem to value Ellsbury far and away above either Coco or Melky. I don't see the Native American-marketing aspect described above as being such a big player in this (although it might help a little), but if the percieved value is that high it would be interesting to see what the Yankees could do to match it.

[DJnVa]

Source: http://www.nj.com/sp...?....xml&coll=1

If that "extra piece" is Pat Neshek, I do the deal ASAP. He would be the absolute perfect addition to this bullpen. In fact, I think I'd prefer Ellsbury/Lester/Lowrie/Bowden for Santana and Neshek than Crisp/Lester/Lowrie Bowden for Satana.

If this info is accurate, then we may have a bit of movement on the Sox side. We've gone from no Ellsbury, to (possibly) the inclusion of him if something else comes back. Whether that could be Neshek (yes please) or the Rookie League CF Revere (who *may* be redundant if they get Ellsbury, but I guess would have to be a PTBNL since he was just drafted in 2007. CAVEAT: Not up on the Twins prospects--I know Keith Law didn't like him) is unknown, but this is the first story we're hearing that Ellsbury may not be as "untouchable" as was said all week

[BoSox24]

If this info is accurate, then we may have a bit of movement on the Sox side. We've gone from no Ellsbury, to (possibly) the inclusion of him if something else comes back. Whether that could be Neshek (yes please) or the Rookie League CF Revere (who *may* be redundant if they get Ellsbury, but I guess would have to be a PTBNL since he was just drafted in 2007. CAVEAT: Not up on the Twins prospects--I know Keith Law didn't like him) is unknown, but this is the first story we're hearing that Ellsbury may not be as "untouchable" as was said all week

This latest piece on the inclusion of Ellsbury comes on the heels of the Yanks adding in Hughes really smells of the Sox playing mind games with the Yanks and driving up the price. I wouldnt be surprised if Theo realizes that it is a one horse race without the Sox and he is still driving up the price.

[possumbait]

Via Baseball Toaster, this content from Buster Olney:

There are a lot of factors involved in these talks, including the desire of ownership, so it's possible that the Red Sox could finish the deal. It's possible that the Steinbrenners will push for Santana. But I would bet that if you gave truth serum to either Boston general manager Theo Epstein or Yankees GM Brian Cashman, they would tell you that they secretly hope the other team winds up giving up the boatload of prospects and dollars for Santana -- because doling out this kind of package in prospects and money is not something Epstein or Cashman believe in, philosophically.

I'd bet if you gave Cashman and Epstein truth serum, they would admit that they would prefer to package prospects and trade them to Oakland for Dan Haren, the 2007 AL All-Star starter who would be a much more cost-efficient acquisition because he is under contract for only $16.25 million (including an option for 2010) over the next three years.

But Epstein and Cashman have to stay at the Santana table, playing this game of pitching poker, because their rival is staying at the table.

Interesting spin. Here is my thought: Why can't the Yankees go balls to the wall, make trades happen for Santana AND Haren and use FA signings to fill in CF and 2B holes as needed. Sure it is costly, but they got the resources. Sure it depletes their system, but between Cashman and said resources they are demonstrably able to refill it pretty quickly.

Santana and Haren would be pretty studly. Anyway, this is a scenario, completely made up but I think plausible, where the Yanks may be a little more invested in Santana than Olney would give them credit for.

[OCD SS]

I did not see this article from BP linked to anywhere. IMO it does a good job of summing up the Twins' needs and what they should be looking for. The issue I have with Sheehan's column is not his conclusion that the Dodgers would be the best fit, but that they are willing to trade their prospects to get involved:

The Dodgers are an even better fit, loaded with hitters (Matt Kemp, Andy LaRoche, James Loney, Ching-Lung Hu), prone to trading them away and dying to make a big move.

Doesn't really ring true.

[Todd Benzinger]

Olney and various other reporters are falling in love with the bidding war/ one team is just bluffing angle.

I don't buy it. I think it is a way for reporters to put their on stamp on the story, and generate something "intriguing" to talk about. Of course, there is no downside to reporting this speculation... Olney can even try to keep it alive if the Sox do land Santana (they overpaid, they were just trying to bluff and wound up holding the bag... etc etc). Of course there is no way to ever find out if this is true, so it is safe and sexy for the reporters, but I am very skeptical of its value as information.

Back in reality, Santana is after all the reigning best pitcher in the game. Yes, each team is motivated by wanting to play keepaway or at least to raise the price on their rival. But if they didn't want Santana and wanted Haren more, they would not be "stuck at the table" because their rival was there too. They would be working out a deal to get Haren.

But Haren is an attractive young pitcher who most likely just had a career year due to good luck and circumstances. He is likely to be very good for a while. I kind of doubt the Sox and Yanks are each secretly hoping to land the guy who will cost less money, but more prospects, and who projects to be very good rather than dominant over the next 3-4 years.

Edited by Todd Benzinger, 01 December 2007 - 12:52 PM.

[Arock78]

As much as I like the notion of Haren over Santana (cost-effective, underrated by some), Santana's a much better fit for the Sox.

We're talking about the difference between an upgrade from Lester to Haren and an upgrade of Lester to Santana.

The Sox are most likely going to make the playoffs in 2008 with any two of Lester, Haren, and Santana. Once in the playoffs, the upgrade of Lester to Santana, to my mind, makes the bigger difference and almost renders Haren over Lester moot, (i.e. not worth giving up any prospects).

I think if the Sox make any move, it should be for Santana. Otherwise, I'd rather the Sox take their chances with both Lester and Buchholz in the rotation.

[mt8thsw9th]

Ellsbury, as a Native American, may open an untapped portion of the fanbase for the Twins. The Native American population in New England is only slightly above 40,000, but it is over 200,000 in the 5 state Twins market:

MN - 54,967
WI - 47,228
SD - 62,283
ND - 31,329
IO - 8,989

With the difference in onfield skills / cost not that significant, this may well be what is driving the Twins to covet Ellsbury as their primary target. I know he is Navajo and not from a plains tribe, but I can't see that being a deterent to a marketing campaign geared toward this ethnic group.

What is the per capita income of these people, and do you think Native Americans care about just any Native Americans? How many of these people are Navajo, considering the bulk live in Southwestern United States. This is akin to saying the Red Sox should sign up a Korean or Chinese player to further mine the Japanese fanbase. Additionally, it's not like Jacoby was plucked off a reservation, he was a reasonably privileged kid who went to a major university, so I highly doubt a large portion of them would identify with him. Navajos make up less than 1 percent of the country's population, his ancestry isn't going to make any difference at all in a team's fanbase. If anything, he could make a small, even tiny dent in the MLB's fanbase, but I really doubt, and would hope this wouldn't be part of the Twins thinking when they're considering who they should acquire. I mean, do you think the Twins are thinking about what Coco Crisp could do for the African-American portion of their fanbase?

[glennhoffmania]

If that link about Damon in the news only thread is true then I'm less concerned. If they want to go with an OF of Matsui/Damon/Abreu they're in trouble. All three were hurt and declining last year and their 4th OF will be nothing special. I was sure they would trade Cabrera and then go after Jones or Rowand.

This team mismanages it's resources like nothing I've ever seen. It's like if Microsoft dumped all of its free cash into R&D for new dial-up technology.

[TheYellowDart5]

If that link about Damon in the news only thread is true then I'm less concerned. If they want to go with an OF of Matsui/Damon/Abreu they're in trouble. All three were hurt and declining last year and their 4th OF will be nothing special. I was sure they would trade Cabrera and then go after Jones or Rowand.

This team mismanages it's resources like nothing I've ever seen. It's like if Microsoft dumped all of its free cash into R&D for new dial-up technology.

While I agree that moving Damon to CF is a risky bet, I fail to see how acquiring the best pitcher in baseball is a mismanagement of resources.

[glennhoffmania]

While I agree that moving Damon to CF is a risky bet, I fail to see how acquiring the best pitcher in baseball is a mismanagement of resources.

I wasn't talking about Santana. Their OF will cost them about $42m and all three are pretty risky to some extent. That's one example. They'll have a payroll approaching a quarter of a billion dollars that provides two reliable, proven starters, one reliable bullpen arm, shitty defense, and a bunch of overpaid, aging hitters. I don't see how that's using their resources efficiently.

[SoxFanSince57]

I wasn't talking about Santana. Their OF will cost them about $42m and all three are pretty risky to some extent. That's one example. They'll have a payroll approaching a quarter of a billion dollars that provides two reliable, proven starters, one reliable bullpen arm, shitty defense, and a bunch of overpaid, aging hitters. I don't see how that's using their resources efficiently.

IMO, the implicit statement that the MFY would be making by moving Damon back to CF and forgoing Rowand/Jones is really an economic one. It seems that they have decided that they would not want to spend the money on Rowand/Jones because these two players would not be worth the investment/risk of a long-term contract.

So perhaps the MFY are actually being financially sensible with this prospective decision. They can get a fleet-footed defensive-minded 4th OFer anywhere and for virtually nothing.

[Maalox]

Olney and various other reporters are falling in love with the bidding war/ one team is just bluffing angle.

I don't buy it. I think it is a way for reporters to put their on stamp on the story, and generate something "intriguing" to talk about. Of course, there is no downside to reporting this speculation... Olney can even try to keep it alive if the Sox do land Santana (they overpaid, they were just trying to bluff and wound up holding the bag... etc etc). Of course there is no way to ever find out if this is true, so it is safe and sexy for the reporters, but I am very skeptical of its value as information.

Undoubtedly there is an element of that. There is also some reason to believe that Epstein may be, as Olney says, "philosophically against" this kind of prospect-for-star exchange. At the very least his resumé is heavily small-market. Of Cashman, who has only ever worked for the Yankees, that cannot be said; maybe he's "philosophically against" these trades as well, but his organization historically has been for them in practice.

Olney is making an educated guess. The accuracy of that guess turns on the question of who is really running the Santana trade talks for New York. My guess, less well educated, is that the Yankees are serious and the Red Sox are serious until they have to trade Buchholz.

[Todd Benzinger]

Undoubtedly there is an element of that. There is also some reason to believe that Epstein may be, as Olney says, "philosophically against" this kind of prospect-for-star exchange. At the very least his resumé is heavily small-market. Of Cashman, who has only ever worked for the Yankees, that cannot be said; maybe he's "philosophically against" this as well, but his organization clearly is all for it.

Well, it could also be argued that the Sox as an org and at least one of their key advisers (Bill James) are philosophically committed to the idea that truly elite talent is worth a serious premium. That of course does not mean that they would want Santana at all costs, but it makes me think they probably wouldn't be that upset about trading some good I am too lazy to type the one extra letter in prospects and paying big bucks for him. I'm not sure Santana (who is pretty uncontroversially the best pitcher going right now) qualifies as "I am too lazy to type the one extra letter in prospects for star" material, more like "I am too lazy to type the one extra letter in prospects for super elite talent," which I think is (philosophically) somewhat different.

Now, the Sox FO may well believe that Buchholz and Ellsbury are also truly elite talent. I could be wrong, but I doubt they think Haren is (which was one of the things that makes me skeptical about Olney's grasp on FO philosophy). And they may have serious reservations about how good a bet it is that Santana will hold up physically, given all the IP, despite his relatively young age. But I see no convincing reason to doubt that the Sox would be pretty happy with the deals we've been hearing about, which so far haven't included their potentially "truly elite" I am too lazy to type the one extra letter in prospects.

Edited by Todd Benzinger, 01 December 2007 - 02:42 PM.

[Wingack]

Some of you guys are acting as if that as soon as the Santana deal is done the offseason will be over. Someone please tell me why the Yankees just can't sign Mike Cameron or Milton Bradley for very cheap to fill the not so gaping whole left in CF by Melky.

I am still processing this offer from my Yankee fan perspective and if they can trade Hughes and maintain a lot of the organzational depth, then I am pleased with it.

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

Undoubtedly there is an element of that. There is also some reason to believe that Epstein may be, as Olney says, "philosophically against" this kind of prospect-for-star exchange. At the very least his resumé is heavily small-market. Of Cashman, who has only ever worked for the Yankees, that cannot be said; maybe he's "philosophically against" these trades as well, but his organization historically has been for them in practice.

Olney is making an educated guess. The accuracy of that guess turns on the question of who is really running the Santana trade talks for New York. My guess, less well educated, is that the Yankees are serious and the Red Sox are serious until they have to trade Buchholz.

And that is somewhat puzzling to me, because if the Sox are in the market to trade for the best pitcher in the game today, then I would think logically the Sox would be more inclined to give up Buchholz in such a deal, since they'd be receiving pitching in return. Buchholz is a terrific prospect, but he's only got a chance of ever approaching what Santana already is, and I would think he'd be rendered a touch redundant in any deal which brings Santana back to the Sox.

I would certainly think, from the Twins' perspective, that any deal they make involving Santana has to result in them getting back a pitcher who has a good chance at becoming a number 1 starter at some point. If they make the deal with the Yankees, then Hughes is that player. If they make a deal with the Sox, then I would think Buchholz has to be that player; Lester is a nice pitcher but it currently appears his control issues would prevent him from being the number 1 starter in the rotation that Hughes or Buchholz might well become.

[PooNani]

I'm with you, but i'm not convinced that the Daily News list of "Hughes, Cabrera, and a pitching prospect" is what's going to get it done. Once Jackson, Tabata, or Kennedy is added as the third guy i'm retracting my approval. Also, they are the only source thus far to state that the third player would be a pitching prospect (my assumption is that it's Horne)

Edited by PooNani, 01 December 2007 - 02:57 PM.

[Grubbery]

Some of you guys are acting as if that as soon as the Santana deal is done the offseason will be over. Someone please tell me why the Yankees just can't sign Mike Cameron or Milton Bradley for very cheap to fill the not so gaping whole left in CF by Melky.

I am still processing this offer from my Yankee fan perspective and if they can trade Hughes and maintain a lot of the organzational depth, then I am pleased with it.

Well, it may be posturing, but there's a report in the Santana news thread that the MFY are committed to moving Damon back to center. But if the MFY want to insert the blackhole that is Mike Cameron into their lineup go for it. I'd also pay good money to watch Girardi manage Bradley for a season.

Edit: Christ I cannot type today...

Edited by Grubbery, 01 December 2007 - 02:58 PM.

[E5 Yaz]

I would certainly think, from the Twins' perspective, that any deal they make involving Santana has to result in them getting back a pitcher who has a good chance at becoming a number 1 starter at some point. If they make the deal with the Yankees, then Hughes is that player. If they make a deal with the Sox, then I would think Buchholz has to be that player; Lester is a nice pitcher but it currently appears his control issues would prevent him from being the number 1 starter in the rotation that Hughes or Buchholz might well become.

If this is the case, and I agree with the premise, than what the Twins are saying to the Red Sox is, either replace Crisp with Ellsbury, or Lester with Buchholz. Olney implies today that his sources say the Twins like the overall Sox package better than the Yankees' offer, if the cornerstone would be either Ellsbury or Buchholz.

I guess I'm just not convinced that the Red Sox are serious here. they make a huge statement about wanting to keep a contract structure in line, particularly when it comes to years, and they're willing to smash it to bits over an admittedly superior player at a position that's not exactly crying out for need? Especially since that will have ramifications with Beckett and/or Matsuzaka down the road.

There's some kind of disconnect or reasoning that I'm not able to square in my mind over this. Especially since the risk/reward of adding Santana seems impossible to judge.

[Oil Can's Liver]

I'm with you, but i'm not convinced that the Daily News list of "Hughes, Cabrera, and a pitching prospect" is what's going to get it done. Once Jackson, Tabata, or Kennedy is added as the third guy i'm retracting my approval. Also, they are the only source thus far to state that the third player would be a pitching prospect (my assumption is that it's Horne)

I may be wrong..but the Red Sox, not the Yankees are in the drivers seat here. If we get Santana for Crisp/Lester/Lowrie/Masterson..we win. If the Yankees get Santana and give up Hughes/Melky/Kennedy or Tabata..we win again. Santana willbe a HUGE boost but Melky ws pretty productive for them and they still have Mussina and ??? at the end of that rotation if they deal Hughes and Kennedy. The Yankees also have done nothing to address their pen.

I don't think the Yankees are going to part with Hughes. I think this is hooey to make the Red Sox add Buchholz or Ellsbury. I think the Twins really want a fleet-footed Centerfielder and Melky, although not a slug, is nowhere near as fast as Coco or Jacoby. Lester may have a lower ceiling than Hughes, but he is a LEFTY and I think he will be a good #3 and possibly a #2 while Hughes tops out as an ace. Add Masterson and Lowrie and I actually think the Sox deal is better for Minnesota. This is by no means a done deal for the Yankees.

Edited by Oil Can's Liver, 01 December 2007 - 03:10 PM.

[bankshot1]

I've asked this question a couple of times over the last few days: Why do we think the sox are going to push payroll north of $160MM for Johan?

IMO this dance for Santana is more about pushing the price up for the Ys by making them throw Hughes, Cabrera and maybe Kennedy+ into the pot.

IMO the final move is now to see what happens if they swap Ellsbury for Crisp, and if they do, will Hank then have to counter with Kennedy. ie is Kennedy going to kill the deal for Hank?

I don't think it will.

and if it does, and that $160MM payroll is the price to pay, would the body count of Lester, Ellsbury, Lowrie (blocked in Boston) Bowden or Masterson, be an exhorbitant one for a roation of: Santana, Beckett, Schill, Dice-k, Buchholz/Wakes?

Edited by bankshot1, 01 December 2007 - 03:16 PM.

[PooNani]

If the Yankees get Santana and give up Hughes/Melky/Kennedy or Tabata..we win again.

Not exactly. Prospects are still prospects. Then again, there is zero indication anywhere that Kennedy AND Hughes is something that the Yankees would consider.

I don't think the Yankees are going to part with Hughes. I think this is hooey to make the Red Sox add Buchholz or Ellsbury.

Not buying this. The Red Sox ARE in the drivers seat, if you consider their rotations going forward, since the Yankees big three youngsters will be a work in progress in 2008. There is zero benefit (on the Yankees' part) to elevating the price higher and higher, even if it means the Red Sox including Ellsbury. They'd have a front five of Santana, Beckett, Buchholz, Schilling, and Matsuzaka. That COULD be historic and lead to an overreaction on the Yankees part (Blanton/Haren)

I think the Twins really want a fleet-footed Centerfielder and Melky, although not a slug, is nowhere near as fast as Coco or Jacoby. Lester may have a lower ceiling than Hughes, but he is a LEFTY and I think he will be a good #3 and possibly a #2 while Hughes tops out as an ace. Add Masterson and Lowrie and I actually think the Sox deal is better for Minnesota. This is by no means a done deal for the Yankees.

You're saying the Crisp/Lester/Lowrie/Masterson deal is better than Hughes, Cabrera, Tabata?

[Muzzy Fielder]

Well, it could also be argued that the Sox as an org and at least one of their key advisers (Bill James) are philosophically committed to the idea that truly elite talent is worth a serious premium. That of course does not mean that they would want Santana at all costs, but it makes me think they probably wouldn't be that upset about trading some good I am too lazy to type the one extra letter in prospects and paying big bucks for him. I'm not sure Santana (who is pretty uncontroversially the best pitcher going right now) qualifies as "I am too lazy to type the one extra letter in prospects for star" material, more like "I am too lazy to type the one extra letter in prospects for super elite talent," which I think is (philosophically) somewhat different.

Now, the Sox FO may well believe that Buchholz and Ellsbury are also truly elite talent. I could be wrong, but I doubt they think Haren is (which was one of the things that makes me skeptical about Olney's grasp on FO philosophy). And they may have serious reservations about how good a bet it is that Santana will hold up physically, given all the IP, despite his relatively young age. But I see no convincing reason to doubt that the Sox would be pretty happy with the deals we've been hearing about, which so far haven't included their potentially "truly elite" I am too lazy to type the one extra letter in prospects.

One of the benchmarks for the Sox rookie prospects is, can they perform on the big stage? On the one hand, you have the likes of Cla Meredith, Craig Hansen, and to a certain extent, Manny Delcarmen... Dustin Pedroia was pegged in that group after his slow start, but he has reached the benchmark I mentioned.

With Ellsbury, Buchholz and Lester, we have seen them all come up BIG in September and October baseball. It is a small sample size, but they have shown they have what it takes to perform when the pressure is on (Saturn Ballsesque). Ellsbury gave the team a real jolt when he came up for good to fill in for Manny, Buchholz came through with a no-hitter and a big relief appearance at Camden Yards where he could have wilted after getting in a jam. Lester has beaten cancer and pitched a great game 4 in the World Series.

It is crazy to compare these guys with Santana in their overall talent and achievement so far at the MLB level, but they certainly are at least on par with this 'big game' gutsy player (somehwat intangible) benchmark.

Of course, we may all over value, or over appreciate our 3 rookies because they have shone bright on the big stage, but if we get on players like Hansen for shrinking under pressure, they should all be given some respect for not, as Beckett said, "screwing up".

edit to add--

I wouldn't be upset if the Sox fail to land Santana, as the saying goes, don't put all your eggs in one basket, and who knows how a 6 year 150 million contract might affect the contract concerns of other players. A spring training of NESN promos with Buchholz, Lester and Ellsbury does seem just as appealing as a Santana filled promo.

Edited by Muzzy Fielder, 01 December 2007 - 03:54 PM.

[Oil Can's Liver]

You're saying the Crisp/Lester/Lowrie/Masterson deal is better than Hughes, Cabrera, Tabata?

I am not saying that at all. I am saying that any deal the Yankees offer short of Hughes/Melky/and Kennedy or Tabata is easily trumped by Crisp/Lester/Lowrie/Masterson. I do not think the Yankees will include both Hughes and Kennedy.

[Oil Can Dan]

Not exactly. Prospects are still prospects. Then again, there is zero indication anywhere that Kennedy AND Hughes is something that the Yankees would consider.

The Yankees have included righthander Phillip Hughes to its offer, which is believed to be Hughes, Melky Cabrera and Ian Kennedy.

Twins Insider

edit - doesn't warrant another post in the thread but the point here is that your claim that there's "zero" indication of Hughes & Kennedy is incorrect. The Star-Tribune isn't exactly some random fan website, and I seriously doubt they'd write that Kennedy is believed to be that 3rd player w/o some indication from some inside source. But that's just my opinion I guess...

Edited by Oil Can Dan, 01 December 2007 - 03:46 PM.

[PooNani]

"believed to be". Seems like an assumption on the part of the writer. Everywhere else has talked about the third prospect being Horne, Tabata, Jackson or someone else....and Hughes REPLACING Kennedy in the package. I'll eat my hat if its Hughes and Kennedy together, that would create a mammoth hole in the rotation


edit, with more support with an update from Olney

http://sports.espn.g...tory?id=3136495

For now, however, the Yankees are right in the thick of the bidding, having decided in internal discussions on Friday to offer pitcher Phil Hughes, rather than Ian Kennedy, into their offer, along with Melky Cabrera and a third player -- in all likelihood, a minor leaguer. The Yankees have told the Twins that the third player cannot be any of their very best young players -- Kennedy or Joba Chamberlain or second baseman Robinson Cano, for example, but a second-tier prospect.

Edited by PooNani, 01 December 2007 - 03:46 PM.

[Bowlerman9]

I've asked this question a couple of times over the last few days: Why do we think the sox are going to push payroll north of $160MM for Johan?

IMO this dance for Santana is more about pushing the price up for the Ys by making them throw Hughes, Cabrera and maybe Kennedy+ into the pot.

IMO the final move is now to see what happens if they swap Ellsbury for Crisp, and if they do, will Hank then have to counter with Kennedy. ie is Kennedy going to kill the deal for Hank?

I don't think it will.

and if it does, and that $160MM payroll is the price to pay, would the body count of Lester, Ellsbury, Lowrie (blocked in Boston) Bowden or Masterson, be an exhorbitant one for a roation of: Santana, Beckett, Schill, Dice-k, Buchholz/Wakes?

Where did you get this 160M number from?

The Sox payroll will be somewhere between 125-130M after Timlin is signed and Youkilis's contract is finalized. Santana makes 13.5M this year. If they got Santana they would pretty much be done for 2008, give or take a catcher. Thats roughly a 145M payroll, right where they were last year.

The Sox have about 72M worth of contracts for 2009. They could "pencil" Santana in for 20M and then worry about how they want to spend the other 65M later.

Again, where are you pulling this 160M number from?

[Drek717]

I got no problems with the Yankees hanging onto Kennedy, or Chamberlain for that matter. NY played a pretty good shell game with them both last year, getting small stints at each level so no one got to see/scout them very much at each stop. Doesn't change the reality that both were 3.90 ERA pitchers just a year ago in college. Both strike me as small sample size hype.

The smart move on the Yanks part would be to dump Chamberlain and Kennedy now while the value is inflated, keeping the significantly more legitimate prospect Hughes to themselves.

[bankshot1]

I started out at $144MM subtracted out Clement's $9MM, assumed the adds and deducts of raises and new benchplayers were roughly the same and used a $25MM for Santana, (even though its $14MM for '08, you never know what might occur in a hardball negotiations) and got to $160MM.

Edited by bankshot1, 01 December 2007 - 04:07 PM.

[The_Powa_of_Seiji_Ozawa]

And that is somewhat puzzling to me, because if the Sox are in the market to trade for the best pitcher in the game today, then I would think logically the Sox would be more inclined to give up Buchholz in such a deal, since they'd be receiving pitching in return. Buchholz is a terrific prospect, but he's only got a chance of ever approaching what Santana already is, and I would think he'd be rendered a touch redundant in any deal which brings Santana back to the Sox.

Not sure if this is noise, but 2 points to make in response to the above:

1. IMO, Buchholz doesn't need to approach what Santana already is in order for him to qualify as an untouchable commodity. Buchholz has excelled at the minor league level, and swallowed his major league cup of coffee whole like it was a shot of whiskey, strong and smooth. There are no sure things, but Clay is a pretty damned good bet to succeed, and with his salary for the next 5 years, that's just something this team has to take advantage of.

2. perhaps I misread what you are saying, I don't see how Buchholz would be rendered redundant if Santana comes to Boston. The goal should be to get the best 5 pitchers that the budget will allow for. Santana and Buchholz are not mutually exclusive long term. as a max contract pitcher, it would be more likely that Santana would make someone like Beckett redundant (actually, financially prohibitive) long term once Beckett is up for renewal...not sure if even Boston can afford to have veteran #1 pitchers close to their prime with simultaneous long term contracts.

Edited by The_Powa_of_Seiji_Ozawa, 01 December 2007 - 04:12 PM.

[Bowlerman9]

I started out at $144MM subtracted out Clement's $9MM, assumed the adds and deducts of raises and new benchplayers were roughly the same and used a $25MM for Santana, (even though its $14MM for '08, you never know what might occur in a hardball negotiations) and got to $160MM.

But you didnt subtract out Pineiro, Romero, Hinske, etc.

Thats just a very lazy way of figuring out payroll. Start from 0, look at the actual contracts, and go from there.

We're at about 128M if you count Timlin and Youkilis as 3M each, FWIW.

[glennhoffmania]

Plus Santana makes $13m in 2008, not $25m.

Edited by glennhoffmania, 01 December 2007 - 04:18 PM.

[PooNani]

Heyman adds to the previous Olney report

http://sportsillustr...date/index.html

Following internal discussions among front-office executives, the Yankees on Saturday offered young right-hander Phil Hughes in a three-player package for the Twins' ace. Outfielder Melky Cabrera and a third prospect would also be included in the trade.

The third prospect will not be pitchers Ian Kennedy or Alan Horne or outfielder Jose Tabada.

If the Twins accept the offer, it is believed the Yankees will come to terms with Santana on a five- or six-year extension worth more than $20 million per season.

The Yankees had been offering a package leading with Kennedy and Cabrera, but Minnesota insisted that Hughes be included. The Yankees made Joba Chamberlain off limits, but it appears the Twins will settle for Hughes if the other pieces are right.

The Boston Red Sox are having similar debates in their own front office over two players the Twins have requested from them -- outfielder Jacoby Ellsbury and pitcher Clay Buchholz. But it appears that the Red Sox are unlikely to surrender either Ellsbury or Buchholz, two highly-coveted players.

Tabada? You know it's a Heyman article when players' names are misspelled

[Sille Skrub]

So far so good, guys. Thank you! You have restored my faith in Al Gore.

Members, feel free to use the "report post" feature if someone decides to break our momentum here.

[NYCSox]

Heyman adds to the previous Olney report

http://sportsillustr...date/index.html
Tabada? You know it's a Heyman article when players' names are misspelled

Unless the Sox offer up Ellsbury there is almost no chance of Kennedy being added to the mix. If, as reported by Olney, the Sox regain the lead if they replace Crisp with Ellsbury then the Yankees will have to make the call on whether to add Kennedy to the mix. So it looks like the ball is squarely in the Sox court. I, for one, would like to see the Sox push the envelope here and make the switch to Ellsbury. Either the Yankees are forced to go to Kennedy to top the offer again or the Sox are in the lead without using Buchholz. Seems to me like a win-win proposition.

Edited by NYCSox, 01 December 2007 - 04:25 PM.

[bankshot1]

But you didnt subtract out Pineiro, Romero, Hinske, etc.

Thats just a very lazy way of figuring out payroll. Start from 0, look at the actual contracts, and go from there.

We're at about 128M if you count Timlin and Youkilis as 3M each, FWIW.

like I said the only specific $ I subtracted was Clement's $. Romero (IIRC) was $4M and Hinske was $2.5MM, I assumed new bench guys would come on at similiar levels.

to me the bigger issue rather than getting to an absolute $ was examining the lost financial flexibility. with losing Lester, Ellsbury, Buchholz, or Crisp . How will adding Santana impact other personnel decisions, in 2-3 years.

Edited by bankshot1, 01 December 2007 - 04:38 PM.

[bankshot1]

Plus Santana makes $13m in 2008, not $25m.

read my post again, what if Santana wanted play hardball & renegotiate his '08 contract?