True or False: The Santana Trade
by John Sickels
on Mar 25, 2008 10:00 AM EDT
True or False:
Five years from now, most Twins fans will be satisfied with the players received from the Mets in the Santana trade.
0 recs |
43
comments
EmailComments
True
While Johan will be Johan for the Mets, Guerra will develop into a very good number two starter, Humber will get back a couple ticks on his fastball and provide quality innings from the middle of the rotation, Mulvey will be a league-average, inning-eating groundball machine, and Gomez will hit .290/.340/.460 with 50 to 60 steals and spectacular defense in center at his peak.
by awsytn on Mar 25, 2008 10:34 AM EDT 0 recs
RE
to say all of that WILL happen is way too optimistic..you just described best case scenario for both prospects.
by jsmall404 on
Mar 25, 2008 2:52 PM EDT
up
0 recs
True
Fans have short attention spans, and as long as they get a solid player or two out of the deal (say Gomez and Mulvey), it is easy to justify the cost/benefit analysis, as in "we have Gomez and Mulvey for $1 million total, which is a way better deal than paying Santana $150 million."
by Diggity Dino on Mar 25, 2008 10:49 AM EDT 0 recs
True
for all the reasons both awsytn and Diggity Dino mentioned.
Support the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society by supporting my endurance training through Team In Training! http://www.active.com/donate/tntmn/tntmnDBimber
by dbimberg on Mar 25, 2008 10:52 AM EDT 0 recs
Twins Fan
As a Twins fan, I was praying Johan would be dealt to the Dodgers for a package of a couple of guys like LaRoche, Kemp, Broxton, Billingsley.
Prospects always have the shine until they come up and go 1-for-26. Gomez seems to have the skills and if he can make it to 1B once or twice a game, that means more fastballs for Mauer, Cuddyer and company.
Someone mentioned Humber in the ROY thread and I see could see him end up in the rotation this year for the Twins - Way to early to give up on him Mets fans. ;) Deolis and Mulvey - Hopefully one of them will be a capable pitcher.
With the injuries to the Sox and Yankees, I wonder more if the either team will regret not trading for Johan. I think Hughes and Kennedy will be capable pitchers, so the Yankees holding onto them is forgiveable.
With the Red Sox, I think Ellsbury (Scott Cooper), Lester (Brian Rose) and Lowrie (Phil Plantier, maybe?) will NOT be All-Stars. My guess, only one of them ends up being a capable Major Leaguer. I think the team that blew it was the Red Sox, but the shine is on Ellsbury, Lester is the feel good story and Lowrie's 1- for-26 hasn't happened yet, so the Red Sox PR Machine was in full effect during the off-season. I'm elated the Twins didn't make that deal with Boston.
Back on point. A deal with the Yankees (or even the Angels or Dodgers) would have been preferred. With the Mets, I think it will be borderline on the Santana deal, but most prospects are unpredictable. Humber might win the Cy Young one day and Deolis might never play in MLB. Remember Johan himself was a Rule V player.
In any event, Billy Smith got his two guys this off-season that he really wanted - Delmon Young and Go-Go Gomez. We'll see if he was right.
by tcbobo on Mar 25, 2008 11:02 AM EDT 0 recs
huh?
Where are you getting these comparisons from, aside from just coming up with the names of random failed prospects? I don't think any of the three Sox players mentioned can possibly be considered underrated, but still, seriously? Also, teams determine the future of top 100 prospects based on ONE WEEK (26 AB??) of playing time??? I realize this is probably hyperbole, but you are really stretching reality here to make a point that you didn't like the Sox package. That's fine, but you're making it seem like the Sox offered Cesar Crespo circa 2004 and a bag of balls. Their offer was at the very least in the ballpark of every other team's bids. And no need to point out that any of the prospects mentioned from any other team mentioned are also likely to fail to live up to expectations - e.g. Kennedy, who instead of "Brian Rose" will "be a capable pitcher".
http://rswanzey.blogspot.com
by rswanzey on
Mar 25, 2008 12:46 PM EDT
up
0 recs
False
Not because I don't think the Twins will get a good return, but because Johan is going to be very good for the Mets. Maybe even HOF good, I don't see any of the current players making fans forget about Santana. They may say "we had to do it" or "It ended up being the best trade... in retrospect" But satisfied? no.
"I couldn't do that. Could you do that? Why can they do it? Who are those guys?"
by maxisagod on Mar 25, 2008 11:07 AM EDT 0 recs
false - Fans Satisfied??
At the time of the trade, it seems to me that most of the analysis showed the players that have been mentioned above as marginal.. I think that none of the four players will do well enough to make the fans feel that the Twins got even value.
Regardless, they could feel that NOT having Santana's huge salary was a good thing. Especially if he gets injured.
afpop
by afpop on Mar 25, 2008 11:08 AM EDT 0 recs
FALSE
and a big false, the Twins will rue the day they didn't take the Red Sox or yankees offer.
Sanatana goes on to be the Pedro Martinez of this generation (5-6 years he's obscenely great) and the Twins get:
A toolsie OFer that never pans out despite given numerous chances. The plate discipline and expected power never arrive so basically you have a hyped 4th OFer
Humber, who never turns out to be anything other than a spare part
Mulvey, who becomes an average backend starter
Guerra, whose early injurt history bothers me and I bet will end up in the bullpen
by ScottAZ on Mar 25, 2008 11:20 AM EDT 0 recs
True
Satisfied w/ players, but bitter there isn't enough money in Minnesota to keep Santana. Big contract + injury = no chance for the Twins. There are good, smart fans in Minnesota & I think they have come to terms w/ their hard realities. Still hurts, though.
by random on Mar 25, 2008 11:41 AM EDT 0 recs
really?
Carl Pohlad is the cheapest owner I know. The guy is on the freaking Forbes 400 and he can't even help out his own team
--http://yankeesfuture.wordpress.com Bobby Mcnally (alias) "Whatever the mind of man can conceive and believe, it can achieve."--Napoleon Hall
by bobbymcnally on
Mar 25, 2008 12:49 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Yes
That's a big part of hard reality to be bitter about. I doubt it will change as long as Pohlad is owner.
by random on
Mar 26, 2008 1:20 PM EDT
up
0 recs
prospects
the twins make a certain amout of revenue a year,the yankees made around 400 million in 2007 with a 200 million payroll = 200 million in pocket.the twins owner shouldn't have to use his own money unless he want's to wich is stupid.another thing about all these experts predicting the next 50 years of prospects,stop it,it is impossible.nobody knows what hughes,joba,kennedy,buchholz,ellsbury will turn into but it makes no sense to sign santanna for 7 years 161 million dollars.every pitcher breaks down between 29-35,pedro,hudson,zito,hampton and on and on.one thing is certain the mets will be paying santanna 23 million a year for a league average pitcher at best for at least 3 or 4 years of his contract,ellsbury is going to be 25 yrs old so his power is at a max,lester is 24, buchholz will be 24 in august,the yankees big three are 21-23 yrs old.only time will tell how these prospects turn out but i like the yankees approach,sign 50 great prospects and 5 or 6 will be great to set the rotation for 10 years,brackman,sanchez,heredia,betances,horne,hughes,joba,kennedy.melancon and they the pitchers that don't fit into the rotation plans can be traded for position players.you can build a great team with a low payroll by drafting the great prospects and locking them up long term for cheap after their league minimum years.the reds are going to be great soon,they have a ton of starting pitchers,the yankees in 2009 will be awesome with 80 million off the books to spend and a ton of pitching prospects closer to the bigs like brackman who was clocked 101 on the gun.
by brucyb on
Mar 28, 2008 9:26 AM EDT
up
0 recs
True
...even two years from now. We've already seen the best of Santana. He'll still be good but not carry-the-team-on-my-back good. Few pitchers can maintain such a dominant peak for this long and he's already showing signs of decline. Even if those prospects aren't studs, Twins fans will be happy to have an extra $20M to spend each year (unless Polhad feigns poverty again).
by HavyBeaks on Mar 25, 2008 11:54 AM EDT 0 recs
"he's already showing signs of decline."
So, instead of being absolutely the best pitcher in the majors, he'll just be what now? Probably the best pitcher? Maybe? He's still the best. A regression into the lower threes in ERA isn't a disappointment, even if it does happen for the next five years, which I don't think it will.
by BlackOps on
Mar 25, 2008 1:41 PM EDT
up
0 recs
+1
Johan not facing a DH and pitching half his games where HR's go to die should trump a little regression due to age. Johan is really capable of putting up some historical numbers over the next couple of seasons.
The Twins will benefit from this trade though, not because they are ending up with more talent, but because they are plugging a lot of holes cheaply. The Twins have for years now had the most disparity between the top talent and dregs on their 25 man of any team in the league. They had 4 guys in the top 11 in MVP voting in 2006 with guys like Ruben Sierra, Rondell White, and Nick Punto getting a ton of PA's because there was no depth whatsoever.
The fact that the Twins have now overpaid for 2 really good guys (Morneau and Nathan) and couldn't go all out for the best guy (Santana) miffs me a little as a fan.
Relax, all right? Don't try to strike everybody out. Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.
Crash Davis
by Terry Ryan Jr on
Mar 25, 2008 8:57 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Overpaid
I'm not sure the Twins overpaid for Morneau and Nathan - you can argue that for a team with a payroll like the Twins, their money would be better spent on different players, but Nathan signed what is if anything a below-market value contract and Morneau's also appears to be around market value.
by Diggity Dino on
Mar 26, 2008 9:06 AM EDT
up
0 recs
False
Because they'll look at the other packages that were reportedly dangled out there and judge their return based on their performances.
The problem: I doubt the Yankees actually offered Phil Hughes+ or the Red Sox offered Ellsburry and Lester. But people will always believe that they did. Fans in Texas were questioning the package JD got for Teixeira, stating that we could have had Kershaw, Meloan and Loney-while in fact that was a pipe dream.
Jarrod Saltalamacchia: The Man, the Myth; The Alphabet.
by BudLight on Mar 25, 2008 12:00 PM EDT 0 recs
True
The chances are one, if not two, of the prospects will work out okay (maybe not superstar status but at least major league regular status). As long as the Twins have a player or two that does good things on a regular basis, Santana was not given up for free and the Twins fans can add to that the savings of a very expensive player.
by Lunkwill Fook on Mar 25, 2008 12:16 PM EDT 0 recs
False
As has been mentioned above, I think that at least one or two of the prospects the Twins got back will develop into quality MLB players. I still believe Carlos Gomez will become a terrific defensive CF and a very strong mix of power and speed. While he will not be a superstar, he would be someone who is a consistent All-Star caliber player in his prime. I think in the long run, Humber will be moved to the pen and become a great reliever due to his pitch assortment and the fact that moving to the pen should get his velo back up to his pre-TJ levels. I don't see Kevin Mulvey ever amounting to much more than a fungible middle reliever or at best, a 3/4 starter who's value comes from being able to make 30 starts. Finally, assuming he stays healthy, I really believe Deolis Guerra could become a front of the rotation starter who is, at times, dominant. If all of that comes to fruition, the Twins will have received ample value in return.
However, Twins fans will remain loathe to call the deal a fair one as none of those players is a Hall of Famer and that is what they gave away. Moreover, the financial circumstances of the deal will continue to shade their opinions in this regard. A very wealthy owner refused to pay a (largely) homegrown HOF pitcher at the beginning of his prime years and instead dealt him for prospects. Moreover, I agree that Twins fans will continue to believe that Phil Hughes (a future ace) or the Red Sox package could have been theirs instead.
A maybe-ace front end starter, an all-star CF, a shutdown reliever and an inning muncher is a very fair return for a pitcher of Johan's caliber. Unfortunately, it's also a package without any true superstar caliber player and one which will be viewed against the other "possible" deals. As a result, I believe that in 5 years the fans of the Twins will believe that they got a decent return on Johan, but not the best possible one and the entire situation will remain a dark moment in franchise history. So, no, Twins fans will, by and large, not be satisfied with the trade.
(despite the fact that they should be)
by GuyinNY on Mar 25, 2008 12:48 PM EDT 0 recs
OT
Does anybody know how to edit a post? I'd really love to be able to do so in the future.
by GuyinNY on
Mar 25, 2008 12:49 PM EDT
up
0 recs
True
Santana's will struggle through much of 2009-11 with injuries, making the Twins trade look like it was timed exceedingly well.
Formerly Uncle Charlie of Minor League Ball
by Yakker on Mar 25, 2008 12:51 PM EDT 0 recs
False
While we have no way of knowing for sure if he was truly ever on the table, missing an opportunity to acquire Phillip Hughes was a huge mistake (provided such an opportunity existed). Hughes blows any other player mentioned in any of the three deals out of the water in terms of upside IMO. Additionally, I think Twins fans are going to lament missing the Sox package as well, since Humber and Mulvey are likely little more than fringe pieces, while Lowrie/Ellsbury/Lester/Masterson all have upside beyond the #3/#4 starter that the two aforementioned Mets pitchers provide.
http://rswanzey.blogspot.com
by rswanzey on Mar 25, 2008 1:08 PM EDT 0 recs
True
I give it mid way through the 2009 season for the Twins to be happy with the trade. I think the players they received were the BEST OFFERED. The other rumors were fine and well but they were simply rumors. I have a tough time believing those trades were actually OFFERED and then PULLED.
Also, lets consider this from the Mets perspective. They are the team that snatched Liriano, Nathan and Bonser for AJ in a somewhat under the radar move. I wonder if at the time people figured they could have received more?
by bbdbrandon on Mar 25, 2008 1:35 PM EDT 0 recs
AJ
I think that's a very good point to bring up in the aftermath of any trade. Though in this case, the rumored offers were pretty consistent (for once). And I think the argument to be made about the deal with the Mets is that the Twins appeared to value quantity (value of Mulvey and Humber??) over quality. It seems to me that while it's very possible neither the Red Sox and Yankees rumored packages were 100% on the table at any point, that they could have landed either Ellsbury or (more importantly IMO) Hughes in some variation of a deal. Getting the best available player (Hughes) should have been the priority here IMO with lesser prospects being a modest consideration.
http://rswanzey.blogspot.com
by rswanzey on
Mar 25, 2008 1:47 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Quantity
I pondered this at the time of the trade as well. Had the Twins went after Mulvey instead of Humber would that have meant a downgrade elsewhere in the deal? Maybe dropping Gomez altogether?
Additionally, I think we need to trust the Twins scouting staff here. Just because reporters from 29 other clubs rate Hughes as the best player discussed, it is quite possible the Twins were really not that interested in him as for the reason they kept asking for more. Similarly with Ellsbury.
In my opinion, the trade the Twins made here was the BEST trade. I feel they got equivalents to Ellsbury and Hughes as well as an incredible amount of depth. Depth, is something that one cannot ignore.
by bbdbrandon on
Mar 25, 2008 11:30 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Correction
Should read:
"Had the Twins went after Pelfrey instead of Humber..."
by bbdbrandon on
Mar 25, 2008 11:32 PM EDT
up
0 recs
AJ
Think you mean the "Twins perspective" above, not the "Mets perspective", but your underlying point IMO is not accurate.
At the time, everyone thought the AJ trade was a steal for the Twins, and sure enough, they were right.
Formerly Uncle Charlie of Minor League Ball
by Yakker on
Mar 25, 2008 3:33 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Disagreement
Thanks for the correction.
First, at the time of the AJ trade, I mean the exact moment, it was one that went under the radar. The Twins made it to make room for Mauer, but it really wasn't one where anyone thought the Twins were acquiring the best closer in the league nor one of the best pitchers.
Second, at the time Liriano got traded to the Twins his minor league track record was nearly identical to Guerra. So as of today we are in the same boat as we were with Liriano, a projectable youngster who hadn't taken the strides needed to truly become a stud.
by bbdbrandon on
Mar 25, 2008 11:37 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Fair enough
Well, maybe our contexts matter.
As someone who was in the Bay Area at the time of that deal, I vividly remember hearing the screams and wails about Sabean's blunder. Admittedly people didn't expect this level of dominance from Nathan, thinking of him as an above-average, cost-controlled RP. But the real screams and wails came on Bonser and, to a lesser extent, Liriano (because of his injury concerns rather than on performance/projectability, IIRC) and the sheer unnecessariness (if that's a word) of adding a pr*ck like AJ.
Formerly Uncle Charlie of Minor League Ball
by Yakker on
Mar 26, 2008 12:41 AM EDT
up
0 recs
false
simply because one (or more) of Hughes, Jackson, Lester, Ellsbury, Lowrie will end having much more productive careers than anyone the Twins got in return.
by Galt on Mar 25, 2008 2:06 PM EDT 0 recs
False
there are going to wish they did the deal 1-1 for Hughes at the least.
by jsmall404 on Mar 25, 2008 2:53 PM EDT 0 recs
+1
Yup. Hughes was the one unquestionable can't-miss guy rumored from any team IMO. Everyone else mentioned, regardless of prospect status, has some substantial warts. Hughes, if healthy, is a frontline pitcher for quite some time.
http://rswanzey.blogspot.com
by rswanzey on
Mar 25, 2008 3:32 PM EDT
up
0 recs
False
I was pretty shocked when I heard what they got for him.
The amount of "Trues" here confirms one thing: some of us really, really love prospects on this site. I mean, this is the best pitcher of the decade here. You'd need a near HoF career from a guy like Gomez for this trade to have value...
by SmokeyJoeWood on Mar 25, 2008 3:05 PM EDT 0 recs
False
And even more false when they look at what some other teams got for lesser players this offseason.
by nyy601 on Mar 25, 2008 3:30 PM EDT 0 recs
False
There were better offers out there. Though the guy saying that they should have gone straight up for Hughes should lay off the Jungle Juice.
This is me being polite.
by CrimsonLiederhosen on Mar 25, 2008 6:48 PM EDT 0 recs
True
At least one of Humber, Mulvey, and Guerra will turn into a pretty good pitcher and Gomez will one day be the Jose Reyes of the OF...
www.newjackhustlers.net
by Ur on Mar 25, 2008 7:29 PM EDT 0 recs
False
They'll be too busy looking at what they could have had like Phillip Hughes
by cowboy4eva on Mar 25, 2008 9:58 PM EDT 0 recs
false
though i think in reality it has less to do with how the prospect themself do, but how the Twins do as a team.
if these guys don't do much but the Twins still keep winning the division / WC every other year like earlier in the decade. they'll be happy
if they keep finishing 4th/5th . then they'lll be pissed even if all the prospect turns out well
by RollingWave on Mar 25, 2008 11:49 PM EDT 0 recs
False
No original insight here...bloggers will probably be happy with the level of performance with one or even two of the guys the Twins got in exchange, but unless Santana blows out his arm or develops Steve Blass Syndrome, nobody the Twins got in that trade will do as well as Santana himself does, and for most fans, that'll mean the Twins lost the trade.
I'm even willing to predict that Santana will still be pitching when all three of the pitchers the Twins got in return are out of their organization -- making the trade seem that much more lopsided in the Mets' favor.
by dwintheiser on Mar 26, 2008 8:11 PM EDT 0 recs
True
Let's just take a look at 'small-sample' spring training result:
'Rumor to Boston'
Ellsbury: .209/.271/.349
Lawrie: .098/.174/.098
Lester: ERA 6.0 (12IP)
Masterson: ERA 2.25 (4IP)
and Coco Crisp (in 2 different packages)
'Rumor to Yankee'
Cabrera: .340/.414/.460
Hughes: ERA 7.02 (16.2IP)
?Marquez?: ERA 9.00 (1IP)
'Actual to Mets'
Gomez: .286/.311/.500
Humber: ERA 1.29 (14IP)
Mulvey: ERA 6.00 (6IP)
Guerra: ERA 0.00 (2IP)
At this point: the packages seem to be comparable. Nothing is certain of course. Humber is better than expected and would definitely start at some point during the season. Gomez already got the starting CF position. So the return doesn't look so lopsided at this point.
Santana was starting to get hammered in 2007, and so he probably need a change of scenery to continue to dominate. But for the Twins to commit 150mill to a declining Santana, it's probably an unwise move.
by fastclock on Mar 26, 2008 11:32 PM EDT 0 recs
The problem
The problem with this sort of analysis is that the small amount of information is actually so without use as to be misleading. In spring training, they are not competing wholly or even largely against major league players, they are not competing at full strength, they are playing in minor league parks in a relatively casual atmosphere. You acknowledge that it's a small sample silze; the sample size combined with the context make spring training stats unhelpful.
Personally, I think the Twins got hosed, though I'm prepared to be wrong about that. I'm just not sure I see a future major league regular in the package they received; if it plays out like that, it's a disastrous trade.
Where Anne hath a will, Anne Hathaway.
by woodstein52 on
Mar 28, 2008 10:38 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
New FanPost