| Author | Comment | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
 captainliteral |
johan santana |
Lead | ||
|
RemDawg
Posts: 2911 11/29/07 3:55 PM RemDawg |
Well, we know who the players are, but this report out of the twin cities has the sox as front runners giving up crisp, lester, lowry and masterson
www.twincities.com/walters I say do it, the sox would have an incredible rotation. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
maxdawgbu98 |
Re: johan santana | #1 | ||
|
RemDawg
Posts: 3574 11/29/07 4:39 PM Green Monster Dawg |
mama!
A rotation of: Beckett Santana Matsuzaka Wakefield Schilling w/ Buchholz in reserve. Amazing! I'm scared of giving a starter that much money for so long (6/150 I've heard). Would Beckett have a problem making so much less while being the #1? Its not my money, so I'd love it, plus I don't want him to go to the Yankees. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Schills Mighty Ankle |
Re: johan santana | #2 | ||
|
RemDawg
Posts: 2965 11/29/07 4:43 PM Patriot Nation Dawg |
This deal will never happen with out atl least Buchholz or Ellsbury
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
marcgoldman |
Re: johan santana | #3 | ||
|
RemDawg
Posts: 6971 11/29/07 4:50 PM RemDawg |
I am not so sure that Buchholz and/or Ellsbury are must guys to make a deal work.
The package as proposed has 2 starting pitchers in it, one that MLB tested and a SS (and the Twins just traded one of those I believe?) and a proven MLB CF with a reasonable contract (and the Twins just lost one of those I believe). It is a very strong package. I am not sure how or where the Twins do better. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Schills Mighty Ankle |
Re: johan santana | #4 | ||
|
RemDawg
Posts: 2965 11/29/07 4:52 PM Patriot Nation Dawg |
I guess looking closer at it they do get a Good SP in Lester An up and coming RP in Masterson a Decent-Good CF and a STAR SS IMO.
I dunno it just seems to me we get the better end of the deal but if we can get Johan without giving up our 2 top spects im totally cool with it |
|||
|
|
||||
|
maxdawgbu98 |
Re: johan santana | #5 | ||
|
RemDawg
Posts: 3574 11/29/07 4:52 PM Green Monster Dawg |
would you rather have:
Lester, Crisp, Materson & Lowrie or Cabrera, Hughes + Tabata (or some other minor leaguer) |
|||
|
|
||||
|
youngd2 |
Re: johan santana | #6 | ||
|
RemDawg
Posts: 10194 11/29/07 4:53 PM RemDawg |
It would be nice to give up one less player for a one year rental, but we would have one great rotation if everyone stays healthy.
_________________
Green Monster 1947 - 2002. RIP |
|||
|
|
||||
|
maxdawgbu98 |
Re: johan santana | #7 | ||
|
RemDawg
Posts: 3574 11/29/07 4:58 PM Green Monster Dawg |
Quote: My understanding is Johan has full no trade and won't approve a trade until he has his contract extension, so the deal wouldn't be a rental, and if it was, I don't think the Sox would go near it, or throw in that much talent to get Johan for one year. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Schills Mighty Ankle |
Re: johan santana | #8 | ||
|
RemDawg
Posts: 2965 11/29/07 5:03 PM Patriot Nation Dawg |
Quote: Cabrera Hughes and Tabata |
|||
|
|
||||
|
maxdawgbu98 |
Re: johan santana | #9 | ||
|
RemDawg
Posts: 3574 11/29/07 5:08 PM Green Monster Dawg |
I would prefer Cabrera over Santana, not sold on Hughes, not sure he can stay on the field and I don't know enough about the other guys to know who would be a better get.
What's wrong w/ taking a chance w/ Lester, Buchholz & Ellsbury? The total salaries would probably be a $1M. Is Johan 20 times better? Or have 20 times the impact? Someone who lives in Boston just told me heard on the radio (so take that with a grain of salt or something worth even less than a grain of salt) that Johan doesn't want to go to Boston. If true, that would put an end to this and hurt the Twins chances of getting a good return from the Yankees. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
jack0329 |
Re: johan santana | #10 | ||
|
Rem Pup
Posts: 477 11/29/07 5:33 PM Rem Pup |
Quote: There is nothing wrong with taking a chance with any of these guys. But that's really what it is with prospects....a chance. Santana is a proven commodity and has a chance to win Cy's every year (assuming health). Prospects are all potential. I never quite got why anyone cares what the Sox sign a player for. It's not my $$ so who cares? The tix prices are high already so by not signing a Santana or whomever and running the youngsters out there doesn't mean tix prices will drop. To me if the Sox can get the deal done with these guys mentioned I say do it!! -----------------
Hey you bas***ds, I'm still here.--Papillion 1973 |
|||
|
|
||||
|
captainliteral |
Re: johan santana | #11 | ||
|
RemDawg
Posts: 2911 11/29/07 6:09 PM RemDawg |
Quote: Does manny have 50 times the impact of youk? |
|||
|
|
||||
|
marcgoldman |
Re: johan santana | #12 | ||
|
RemDawg
Posts: 6971 11/29/07 6:16 PM RemDawg |
Quote:Why people care would depend on perspective. But one reasonable concern is the fact that the RS operate on a finite budget. They are close to maxing out every revenue stream they have. They sell out already, they are nearing the ceiling on per ticket prices, their radio deal is the sport's richest already and NESN probably has very modest head room. Now that matters when a team needs to make a deadline deal and it matters as the foundation of controlled labor costs (Dice K, Beckett, Papelbon, Pedroia, Youkilis...) have the ability to arbitrate and/or go into the open market. It matters in terms of what trades you can and can't make. It matters when building a bullpen which is about dead money. In that respect it impacts the future of the team we root for so even though the sport doesn't have a salary cap it has fiscal boundaries even for baseball's second richest team. It is a valid subject for debate in that regard IMO. Quote:I am not sure the NYY part with Hughes but even if they do, I am not sure the RS overall package doesn't do more for the Twins. If that rumored package is true it is a good deal for both parties. Considering the change in baseball and the value of young and "expense controlled" pitching, it is a heck of a package for the Twins in that it provides two of those players and fills their two open needs (SS and CF). |
|||
|
|
||||
|
JimRice75 |
Re: johan santana | #13 | ||
|
Rem Pup
Posts: 101 11/29/07 6:25 PM Rem Pup |
"and a SS (and the Twins just traded one of those I believe?)"
-marcgoldman Actually, they received a SS in that same deal: a better one. Although Brendan Harris plays only a little better defensive SS than Bartlett, he was a much better hitter last year than Bartlett. Of course Harris could also take over at second or third... we'll see soon enough I guess. I'd rather see Lowrie at short for the RED SOX in 2009 than for anyone else though. Santana would be the number one over Beckett if he joined the rotation; there's no way he would be considered a #2, and even Beckett would agree on that. But what concerns me most is giving up Masterson. He has a high ceiling. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
jack0329 |
Re: johan santana | #14 | ||
|
Rem Pup
Posts: 477 11/29/07 6:56 PM Rem Pup |
Quote: I can't say I agree on that one. Maybe #1A and #1B. Becks in no #2 neither is Santana. In his 8 years Santana has 16 more wins than Becks in his 7. Both have one 20 game win season. Santana has a better era but gives up more HR/yr on average. Santana has a better whip by .13 points. So I say I doubt Becks would concede or agree that he should be considered #2. He strikes me as far too competitive for that. www.baseballprospectus.com/dt/santajo01.php www.baseballprospectus.com/dt/beckejo02.php -----------------
Hey you bas***ds, I'm still here.--Papillion 1973 |
|||
|
|
||||
|
youngd2 |
Re: johan santana | #15 | ||
|
RemDawg
Posts: 10194 11/29/07 7:12 PM RemDawg |
Quote:They could sell more ad space in their dump. Oh wait a minute, there isn't much ad space left too. _________________
Green Monster 1947 - 2002. RIP |
|||
|
|
||||
|
marcgoldman |
Re: johan santana | #16 | ||
|
RemDawg
Posts: 6971 11/29/07 7:20 PM RemDawg |
Quote:Is Lowrie at SS and Lester as your LH starter better than Julio Lugo at SS and Santana as your LH starter? the age old argument in trading futures for the present is the ceiling of what you are trading and if what you are trading for is on the decline. While some of the factors are different, the Beckett trade and the Pedro Martinez trade are poster children for how good it can be for a franchise. Knowing Theo's caution with his prospects I personally wouldn't question this trade if it happened. The rotation would be filthy and the ages of the players is quite pleasing. It makes it a go for it now trade, with some years of return on it. There is no question the 2008 RS are a better team with Santana in their rotation than they are with Lester there. And the fact that he is only 28 gives this trade long term impact. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Santsman |
Re: johan santana | #17 | ||
|
RemDawg
Posts: 4228 11/29/07 9:09 PM LOUD Dawg |
Latest rumor is Lester, Crisp, Lowrie and Bowden for Johan. If that's the deal, do it now. Yes Santana has 20X the impact of Lester and Manny has 50x the impact of Youk.
Sants
Thanks 5, 18, 45, 38, 34, 24, 33, 49 and 7 for 2004. Thanks 24, 34, 18, 33, 46, 59, 38, 19, 15, 25 and 7 for 2007. Thanks 8, 9, 27, 14, 19, 42, 39 and 21 for all the good years. Here's to back to back championships in 2008. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
JimRice75 |
Re: johan santana | #18 | ||
|
Rem Pup
Posts: 101 11/30/07 10:38 AM Rem Pup |
"Is Lowrie at SS and Lester as your LH starter better than Julio Lugo at SS and Santana as your LH starter?"
-marcgoldman No. But Lowrie at SS and Buchholz in the rotation will be better than Lugo/Santana IMO. Lester will probably never be better than a middle-of-the-rotation guy, unless he suddenly figures out how to escape innings without throwing 20+ pitches. In Lowrie, we're talking Nomar-type numbers being a possibility, so he will have a ton of impact offensively IMO. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
marcgoldman |
Re: johan santana | #19 | ||
|
RemDawg
Posts: 6971 11/30/07 3:00 PM RemDawg |
Quote:I believe that Lowrie's inclusion in a proposed package was to compensate for Buchholz and Ellsbury's exclusion. Anytime you could do a deal that would insure that through 2011 your starting rotation would include Beckett, Santana, Matsuzaka and Buchholz you have to think really hard about that. This post season I don't think any of RS Nation or the FO cared that Hanley Ramirez was the best SS in the NL as Josh Beckett delivered in every start. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Santsman |
Re: johan santana | #20 | ||
|
RemDawg
Posts: 4228 11/30/07 3:57 PM LOUD Dawg |
Quote: Amen, it would be the same with Santana/Lowrie. I would not care less if Lowrie puts up great numbers with Minnesota if Santana is battling Beckett for the CY for the next 5 years. As for Lowrie, he is a good prospect, not great. He is not projected to give Nomar numbers by any stretch (unless we're talking about 2006-07 Nomar numbers), he has neither the eye nor the power. His power numbers are very average, his glove is below average, arm above average, he will walk a little, strikeout more. He will be an average to slightly above average player with a lot of doubles and a Youk like .290 BA. We tend to value our prospects a little too highly imo. Sants
Thanks 5, 18, 45, 38, 34, 24, 33, 49 and 7 for 2004. Thanks 24, 34, 18, 33, 46, 59, 38, 19, 15, 25 and 7 for 2007. Thanks 8, 9, 27, 14, 19, 42, 39 and 21 for all the good years. Here's to back to back championships in 2008. |
|||
|
|
||||
