I've been analyzing the Twins for years, and I've been reasonably on the mark, including getting most excited about stealing Francisco Liriano in the AJP deal, decrying the possibility of non-tendering David Ortiz, and calling for Jacque Jones' to be dealt after his breakout 2002 season (it was a career year, I was positive). So since I think so much of myself, I feel it only right that I should evaluate, in a very cursory way, the various options the Twins have in dealing the best pitcher in baseball.
Today we hear again the Yankees have pulled their latest offer for Johan Santana. ESPN's report was that the Yankees had offered pitcher Philip Hughes, outfielder Melky Cabrera, pitching prospect Jeff Marquez and another prospect. I'm neither sure who the prospect was nor aware that was Marquez' first name, which, along with my lukewarm feeling about Melky, leads me to exclaim, "heh?". Who knows what to think of the permanency of this decision, but for now this leave the Red Sox and Mets as the only known suitors with offers on the table.
And while the Yankees offered was pulled, it doesn't mean talks can't continue, so I'll examine the current offers the Twins have, including that of the Yankees. What strikes me as I go out and read message boards and comments from articles (like that linked above) is that fans of the teams in the Santana sweepstakes are afraid of giving up their prospects as if they're undoubtedly going to be star players.
As some Twins fans here have mentioned, the prospects being offered up by various teams are just that, prospects. Realistically, unless you're watching a David Wright hit his way up to the Mets, there are hardly any "can't miss" prospects. To give up three "top" prospects is only a bad idea in the sense that a team doing so losing some trading chips. It's a no-brainer, otherwise, when talking Santana.
The Twins can afford Santana. It would have been tougher to do so had they signed Hunter, but they were smart there. Scoping out Santana deals is a move by the Twins to bring efficiency to their organization. Signing Santana is good, but are they better served by grabbing prospects (including a can't miss), immensely lowering payroll, and using that money to lock up young studs? Let's look at what's out there in trade, both in reality and in theory. We'll go team by team.
Red Sox: Ellsbury, Lowrie, Masterson, and prospect or Lester and Crisp in place of Ellsbury. While Ellsbury, Lowrie, Lester, and Crisp will be major leaguers, only Ellsbury and Lester have a chance to be real good, and neither has a chance to be a real star. Ellsbury should be good in a few years, but the Twins don't like dealing with Scott Boras. Lester is a 3 or 4, and the Twins are looking for someone with a 1 ceiling. I would rather sign Santana than do either configuration of this deal.
Yankees: Hughes, M. Cabrera, Marquez, and a prospect. The Twins like this better because they like Hughes. He's not a sure thing, and his motion induces thoughts of injury, but he does have a 1 or 2 upside, and we think he's nearly there now. Cabrera is a filler who won't hurt the Twins, but neither of the other prospects will sway the Twins unless the Yankees give up Jackson or Tabata or possibly Horne as the TBD. The Twins will do this, possibly. They will especially do this if Cano is thrown in there, though I'm not at all high on the 2B who's had the luxury of hacking in the middle of a star-studded lineup. And that's part of the problem with Melky, too. Personally, I think the Twins are just trying to get the best deal from the Yankees so that they can bring it to the other teams.
Mets: Gomez, Martinez, Pelfrey, Humber, Mulvey. If the Mets want Santana, they'd have to give up a package like this. I'm not sure they really want him, though. Frankly, none of these players is anywhere close to a sure thing to be at least average in the major leagues. They all have baseball defects, and only the Mets being in the NL and the mass quantity of bodies here would entice the Twins. Mets fans should wake up and support this type of deal, because their team can replace the worst two of the pitchers with average (or below) veterans, and Santana will be worth far more than the best pitcher and the OFers.
And now the team who might be under the radar:
Mariners: A. Jones, Morrow, Clement, Balentin. The Twins, assuming Santana would extend with Seattle, should do this, and they shouldn't care whether Balentin is involved. Jones is a star just waiting to happen, while Morrow and Clement show extreme promise. The Twins don't get the "ready" pitcher back here, but they don't with the Mets, either.
Angels: E. Santana, Wood, Willits. Not as good as the Mariners' package, but Santana can be special, Wood can be good and dangerous, and Willits would be filler. Weaver may be substituted for E. Santana. I expect the Angels to have secretly contacted the Twins, who are very discreet about these things, and told them they will top any offer.
Dodgers: Kemp, LaRoche, Billingsley/Kershaw. This would be equal or better the Mariners offer, but the Dodgers don't seem to be interested. If it's there, take it.
Showing posts with label David Ortiz. Show all posts
Showing posts with label David Ortiz. Show all posts
Friday, December 28, 2007
Wednesday, December 26, 2007
Locking Up the Johan
At the end of his column today the NY Times' Murray Chass posed the (probably) rhetorical question about whether the Twins don't have the money to extend Johan Santana. They do have the money, of course, and it's very perplexing to those of us following the team. So I decided to give the question my normal thirty second thought to determine if I could convince myself of what has happened, is happening, and will happen.
We in Minnesota understand the general Twins philosophies that (a) the Twins don't sign a pitcher for more than four years and (b) the Twins don't pay a player 25% of their payroll. What those of us never understood about Terry Ryan is why he couldn't see the trap he'd put himself into by not fully appreciating the reasons for locking up your star players, namely that inflation is always going to be ugly and when a star smells free agency, the chance to sign him reasonably is all but done.
The easy example would appear to be Torii Hunter, and to some extent that's true. However, when the Twins signed Hunter after the 2002 season, I was cautious about the money relative to Hunter's ability and actually thought there would be another CF in place after 2006. The Twins, after all, had drafted Denard Span in June, 2002 and all outlets labeled him the heir apparent to Hunter. The Twins were smart enough to include a club option for 2007, just in case Span wasn't quite ready yet. Little did we know that Span wouldn't Pan (out), and that the Twins would probably had been smart to try to get multiple club options in Hunter's contract.
But let's go back to the fall of 2006, the time at which it became clear to the Twins that Span wasn't close to ready and would very possibly never be a starting CF. The Twins exercised their club option on Hunter for 2007 and had the ability to sign him to what can now be called a reasonable extension, in light of Hunter's five year, $90 million contract with the Angels. The Twins in all likelihood could have signed Hunter for four years and $60 million or even slightly less.
The problem, though, and I hope the Twins saw this and weren't just being their cheap selves, was that Hunter was going to be 33 midway through his first season of his contract, five years older than the hitter's prime age of 27-28. Throw in the constant lack of plate discipline and declining fielding skills, and at the very most Hunter's worth to the Twins was somewhat close to $15 million a year for only 2008 and 2009. In other words, this was not about locking up young talent.
No, where I wanted the Twins to lock up young talent was when their best hitter was an overweight 1B/DH. The Twins, in all their wisdom, non-tendered David Ortiz instead. I wish I had blogged back then to prove it to the doubters, but instead you'll have to go to the archives of the Twins Dickie Thon forum and look for someone with "stat" in the name who hated Ryan, Ron Gardenhire, Jacque Jones, and wasn't totally sold on Hunter. Under whatever Statman or Statguy nickname I had, there is an embarrassing amount of screaming and crying about the possibility of Ortiz being released.
Today it seems obvious that a Twins team looking to lock up its young talent would be signing Justin Morneau, not Michael Cuddyer (age/prime again), and looking closely at Francisco Liriano, Scott Baker, Delmon Young, and even Joe Mauer, whose contract will be ending in three years. Hey, Bill Smith, you've got to be looking at it now, not later.
Where the Twins got themselves in trouble with Santana is waiting far too long. After the 2006 season, Santana had shown himself to be the best pitcher in baseball each of the past three years. He had two years left on his contract, and he would be barely 30 by the time his new contract started in 2009. Age 30 for a pitcher is like age 27 for a hitter, so in essence the Twins in dealing with Santana would be locking up a player six years younger than Hunter.
The Twins ended up offering Hunter a three year contract and were willing to pay $15 million a year for ages 33, 34, and 35. Are they not willing to pay a much, much better player--perhaps the best player in baseball--$20 million dollars a year for comparative (think pitchers relative to hitters) age 27 through 33 seasons? Then consider that the value of the $20 million would be affected greatly, baseball inflation-wise, by the fact that the Hunter contract would have run from 2008-2010, while the Santana contract might run from 2009-2015. Add in there that the Twins would be generating new revenue starting with the 2010 season, that Santana has past the injury nexus that most pitchers deal with, and that $20 million would be a much smaller portion of the payroll in 2015 than it would be in 2009, and you see why it's perplexing that the Twins don't make an honest effort to sign Santana long-term.
The very fact that Carlos Silva just got paid $50 million for four years should tell you that the Twins could go at least 7 and 140 for Santana. I mean, what will $20 million mean in 2015? Will it be enough money for some team like the Rangers to sign Boof Bonser? Meanwhile, the Twins likely would be paying a highly possible Hall of Fame pitcher for the last year of his (pitching) prime.
It makes you wonder. Do the Twins see something, or are they afraid of a dropoff in Santana's effectiveness? It's a lot easier to tell yourself a guy's tipping pitches, losing bite, not throwing the slider, or might get injured when you're asked to pony up $140 million.
Oh, and that number is the minimum, folks.
We in Minnesota understand the general Twins philosophies that (a) the Twins don't sign a pitcher for more than four years and (b) the Twins don't pay a player 25% of their payroll. What those of us never understood about Terry Ryan is why he couldn't see the trap he'd put himself into by not fully appreciating the reasons for locking up your star players, namely that inflation is always going to be ugly and when a star smells free agency, the chance to sign him reasonably is all but done.
The easy example would appear to be Torii Hunter, and to some extent that's true. However, when the Twins signed Hunter after the 2002 season, I was cautious about the money relative to Hunter's ability and actually thought there would be another CF in place after 2006. The Twins, after all, had drafted Denard Span in June, 2002 and all outlets labeled him the heir apparent to Hunter. The Twins were smart enough to include a club option for 2007, just in case Span wasn't quite ready yet. Little did we know that Span wouldn't Pan (out), and that the Twins would probably had been smart to try to get multiple club options in Hunter's contract.
But let's go back to the fall of 2006, the time at which it became clear to the Twins that Span wasn't close to ready and would very possibly never be a starting CF. The Twins exercised their club option on Hunter for 2007 and had the ability to sign him to what can now be called a reasonable extension, in light of Hunter's five year, $90 million contract with the Angels. The Twins in all likelihood could have signed Hunter for four years and $60 million or even slightly less.
The problem, though, and I hope the Twins saw this and weren't just being their cheap selves, was that Hunter was going to be 33 midway through his first season of his contract, five years older than the hitter's prime age of 27-28. Throw in the constant lack of plate discipline and declining fielding skills, and at the very most Hunter's worth to the Twins was somewhat close to $15 million a year for only 2008 and 2009. In other words, this was not about locking up young talent.
No, where I wanted the Twins to lock up young talent was when their best hitter was an overweight 1B/DH. The Twins, in all their wisdom, non-tendered David Ortiz instead. I wish I had blogged back then to prove it to the doubters, but instead you'll have to go to the archives of the Twins Dickie Thon forum and look for someone with "stat" in the name who hated Ryan, Ron Gardenhire, Jacque Jones, and wasn't totally sold on Hunter. Under whatever Statman or Statguy nickname I had, there is an embarrassing amount of screaming and crying about the possibility of Ortiz being released.
Today it seems obvious that a Twins team looking to lock up its young talent would be signing Justin Morneau, not Michael Cuddyer (age/prime again), and looking closely at Francisco Liriano, Scott Baker, Delmon Young, and even Joe Mauer, whose contract will be ending in three years. Hey, Bill Smith, you've got to be looking at it now, not later.
Where the Twins got themselves in trouble with Santana is waiting far too long. After the 2006 season, Santana had shown himself to be the best pitcher in baseball each of the past three years. He had two years left on his contract, and he would be barely 30 by the time his new contract started in 2009. Age 30 for a pitcher is like age 27 for a hitter, so in essence the Twins in dealing with Santana would be locking up a player six years younger than Hunter.
The Twins ended up offering Hunter a three year contract and were willing to pay $15 million a year for ages 33, 34, and 35. Are they not willing to pay a much, much better player--perhaps the best player in baseball--$20 million dollars a year for comparative (think pitchers relative to hitters) age 27 through 33 seasons? Then consider that the value of the $20 million would be affected greatly, baseball inflation-wise, by the fact that the Hunter contract would have run from 2008-2010, while the Santana contract might run from 2009-2015. Add in there that the Twins would be generating new revenue starting with the 2010 season, that Santana has past the injury nexus that most pitchers deal with, and that $20 million would be a much smaller portion of the payroll in 2015 than it would be in 2009, and you see why it's perplexing that the Twins don't make an honest effort to sign Santana long-term.
The very fact that Carlos Silva just got paid $50 million for four years should tell you that the Twins could go at least 7 and 140 for Santana. I mean, what will $20 million mean in 2015? Will it be enough money for some team like the Rangers to sign Boof Bonser? Meanwhile, the Twins likely would be paying a highly possible Hall of Fame pitcher for the last year of his (pitching) prime.
It makes you wonder. Do the Twins see something, or are they afraid of a dropoff in Santana's effectiveness? It's a lot easier to tell yourself a guy's tipping pitches, losing bite, not throwing the slider, or might get injured when you're asked to pony up $140 million.
Oh, and that number is the minimum, folks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)