Johan Santana Rumors

So in other words...nothing new.

This probably wont happen but I really hope all three teams say your best offers are off the table take your pick of the current offers. The twins are not going to keep Santana. I think the yankees if anyone will be the ones to bend and do a Hughes/cabrera/kennedy, especially if Hank retains the power he says he does. Hank seems to feel strongly that the yanks need santana.

All 4 of LEN3's bullet points have been issued (almost verbatim) as far back as a month ago. It seems clear that no team is going to budge at this point. I think if on of the three teams wanted Santana (esp NYY or BOS) they would have aggressively landed him by now. What are the Twins waiting for?

"It is what it is," said an official from a club in the loop on the Santana talks. "Three GMs, all of a sudden, acted rationally at the same time. When's the last time that happened?"

I think most agree that Smith over played his hand. Right now, we have a rough idea of what Bedard fetched and he arguably has more value than Santana with that extra year of control.

Of course, you may think that Bedard is more of a question mark than Santana, but there is a reason the Mariners had no desire to go for Santana and targetted Bedard.

Two big time prospects, a good big league reliever, a mediocre prospect in Butler who could be a mid to back end starter, and a lower/throw in prospect is the price for Bedard and the price for Johan should be marginally cheaper. The market has determined his value, but we will see what Smith does.

He certainly looks like a rookie GM so far, though I did like his Young/Garza deal as a whole.

I agree that although Hughes would be a nice addition there are plenty of prospects in the minors to round out the rotation. Of course all of this is pending on Liriano staying healthy.
Taking Ellsbury is the way to go. The line up would be great.
CF Ellsbury
2B Casilla
C Mauer
1B Morneau
LF Young
RF Cuddyer
DH Kubel/Monroe
3B Lamb
SS Everett
or whoever else the get to play 3B and SS.
Much, much better than their sterile offense from last year.

"when your weakest link threw a no hitter"

Just imagine a rotation of Eric Milton, David Wells, Derek Lowe, Kevin Millwood and Anibal Sanchez. Wow!

"however if santana is landed at his asking price, becketts demands may become overwhelming to the red sox budget."

Which is why many are skeptical if they even want him. Buccholz is one of the top three rookie pitchers and they still have Beckett, Lester, and Daisuke to go along with Schilling. Do they truly want him?

They have seemingly maxed out their revenue for the time being and Santana would certainly test their ability to keep out of the red. They have Lester, Buccholz, Bowden, and Masteron, who are certainly all solid pitching prospects.

I guess it boils down to winning as you said and if they made the deal and had a dynasty, it would be worth it. But they are already a 96 win team that won the WS rather handily and they do look slightly better in 2008. Scary to think about, but you can certainly see why they might consider Santana an unneccsary acquisition.

Santana/Beckett ftw-

That would be a pretty sweet lineup but it would ignore the fact no one who was the ROY was manning second base. CC is already an extra outfielder with his range, I don't think we need to throw another guy out there.

Your lineup is illustrative of why talks like this are going on. We have some pretty solid pieces, but a bit of a jam at some positions.

I doubt Bucholz starts the season in the bigs. Our rotation is good enough to hold him back a bit.

The Seattle Mariners did inquire about Santana. The Mariners were one of the teams that expressed initial interest in acquiring him. Apparently, Santana indicated that he would not waive his no trade clause to play for Seattle. They settled for Bedard because Santana was unavailable to them.

It is too soon and there isn't any solid information to suggest that Smith has overplayed his hand. It is just as likely that the Yankees and Red Sox will have misplayed their hands (refusing to include Ian Kennedy by the Yanks and their silly Lester/Crisp and Ellsbury alone offers by the Red Sox). No doubt, the dollars factor into this but in the past, neither the Red Sox or the Yankees have balked at spending whatever they thought necessary to sign a player. If either were to acquire Santana they would be the team to beat in the East.

Only the Mets seem willing to negotiate right now. I think that a lot of us here in the Twin Cities would prefer that Mets get Santana if for other reason than to spit in the face of the Yankees and Red Sox who dictate the terms and expect the Twins to just take what they are offered.

I too agree "I think that a lot of us here in the Twin Cities would prefer that Mets get Santana if for other reason than to spit in the face of the Yankees and Red Sox who dictate the terms and expect the Twins to just take what they are offered."
I also fear that if we get say Ellsbury, he turns out to be only more of a .280 hitter with no power and more of a pedestrian OF than the lightening in a bottle he was for the sox this year...

I would be quite happy with .300 & 15 – 20 + 20 – 30 sb, but feel more realistically .280 - .290 5hr /45-50 rbi and 20 sb…I am also concerned about Lowrie's credentials since several scouts do like his bat, but say he has major short falls with his glove... One even went as far to say he has "hard hands", and will never be a ML SS and might be hard pushed at being even a 2b...
Again, my fear is the typical hype of the Bosox & Yank prospects "making silk out of really sow's ears..."
I will say that I do like the “potential” upside of the Mets prospects, but am very cautious of what they will really equate to…
I feel that Gomez “potentially” could better in the power department than Ellsbury, and that both are comparable on d… As far as the sb category here I think is a wash possibly an edge to Gomez… But then again it’s just by going from speculation and reports.

"However, if Ellsbury can get 15-homer power and steal 20 to 30 bases, I think he will be star."

Its unknown whether he will ever be a true 15-homerun player. A better guess seems like 6-15. However, 20-30 steals isnt a possibility, as a fulltime player that is a foregone conclusion. The guy is INCREDIBLY fast and last year he stole 9 bases in 116 major league at-bats. If he was to lead off and play a full season, that would result in about 45 steals and his minor league track record indicates that he is capable of doing that.

"I am also concerned about Lowrie's credentials since several scouts do like his bat, but say he has major short falls with his glove... One even went as far to say he has "hard hands", and will never be a ML SS and might be hard pushed at being even a 2b..."

I think i saw the report that said "hard hands." From what i remember that comment was based on a scout that saw him play in the AFL. I'm not trying to say his defense doesn't normally have problems, but maybe everything kind of just snowballed there. His offensive performance was downright awful in the AFL as well.

At any rate i can definitely understand a bit of trepidation over acquiring him. Hopefully for his sake though, the AFL was just a hiccup and his defense at short isn't really THAT bad.

edit: found a quote of it from the star tribune.
"I spoke to a National League scout who watched Jed Lowrie in the Arizona Fall League, and he was very negative about Lowrie's defense, using the words 'hard hands'. The scout said there's "not a snowball's chance" Lowrie plays shortstop in the big leagues"

Also, Baseball America this year said in "The Future" section for him (from the Sox Top 10 list) that he'll play 2nd or 3rd, not SS. No reference to how well he'll play 2nd or 3rd though.

Jim Callis seems to contradict that though in the interview following that posting with "On many clubs, Lowrie would the Opening Day shortstop or get the chance to win that job in spring training. But Lugo's contract makes it more likely that Lowrie will open the year in Triple-A. He could hit enough to play second or third base, but he's blocked at those spots by Dustin Pedroia and Mike Lowell." Sounds to me based on that quote like maybe he IS capable of playing SS in the majors or maybe Jim just didn't want to go into more detail.

I am still skeptical at best of all of the packages that are being bandied . What I am seeing is that people are quite high on a player (who caught lightening in a bottle at the right time with one of the most potent offenses in BB), yet down play and consider trash a player (who was rushed to the ML on a decimated team) yet still showed some brilliance.
In the same instance some people still consider 2 other ML OF’s (Melky & Crisp) to having tremendous value. I just don’t understand it…
Honestly, I do not see any of the afore mentioned as the “major” centerpiece, but as the complimenting pieces to the puzzle. People may argue that Ellsbury is this & that, but I still take all with a grain of salt since at this point it is a “sell high” scenario with him…
With Gomez, I see tons of potential, but potential does not always equate. And lastly the final 2, I really see no upside.
I guess what I am trying to say is that the real deal should be more and match where the Twins get 1) quantity, 2) quality, 3) potential be it from any of the potential trade partners, that meaning in in-field players as well as pitching prospects in total, not just one potentially good player and 2-3 moderate, or one good pitching prospect and 2 – 3 adequate in-field players…

Right 2007 is from April of 2007 and really 2006. It is not really all that old and still a relevant figure to use. You also have to factor in the raises they just issued, the ones coming due, and the fact they actually had some playoff revenue in 2006.

I cannot agree with that you when you assume they made more in 2007 versus 2006 with a playoff run. I would say that it is possible they actually made less. Their attendance was more or less the same. Where did the extra revenue come from?

If they did bring back Johan, they would likely scrape by at best until they get their new stadium. Could they make it fit and not be in the red? I presume it is not impossible they could, but they would toe the line of profitability. I think we both agree that would not be a wise way to operate.

Then even when they get their new stadium in 2010, they will be dishing out more cash for their current roster. I guess the x-factor is how much exactly they are due to get as a result of their new stadium. They have a relatively young team with a lot of guys they are going to be needing raises in 2010/2011 and when you add in Johan’s salary, that is a lot of cash they need to be generating over and above what they generate now.

I hope Phil Hughes doesn't leave the pinstripes......

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GX--WnEqLwc

"I cannot agree with that you when you assume they made more in 2007 versus 2006 with a playoff run. I would say that it is possible they actually made less. Their attendance was more or less the same. Where did the extra revenue come from?"

1) More revenue sharing (big market teams made more money, and therefore had to share more money).

2) MLBAM and other national revenues that are divided equally among all the teams anyway.

I will say this: if they do trade Santana, they will almost certainly make less money in 2008.