How's this for a trade re: Santana

[patriotspride]

I think you're working on old information... they've been talking all year with Santana and made an offer and Santana wasn't interested - it seems pretty much accepted in the baseball world that the Twins are actively shopping Santana with an interest in proven players and proven prospects rather than draft picks that will need 3-5 years to develop.

They have a need at center and could be sold on Crisp rather than Ellsbury. If there's not a deal to their liking they can hold him and not trade him til they see how the season shapes up - but the fact that the Twins are shopping him is very real.

the twins haven't shopped Santana. they just made him a contract offer .other teams have contacted the twins about Santana but hes not being shopped. not yet anyway.

 

[Miguel]

http://www.dugoutcentral.com/blog/?p=592

does a pretty god job of breaking down the Santana race

 

[JoeSixPat]

http://www.dugoutcentral.com/blog/?p=592

does a pretty god job of breaking down the Santana race

Didn't you read above? The Twin's aren't interested in trading Santana

(and what did PatriotsPride do to get banned?!?!)

Actually that's a pretty good story that seems to relate what all the sports writers are saying now - that the Twins recognize they're not going to win it all with their current everyday lineup.

They need a center fielder and we have one - and I think its also recognized that we are NOT going to trade Ellsbury, so teams need not posture about that.

I think we'd be in the playoffs next year even without Crisp, Bucholtz and Lester - and adding Santana in return makes that a LOCK, not to mention making us the favorites to repeat as champions - so why not make that deal? We'd probably need one more player to be thrown in - a decent reliever probably - Delcarmen?

Who knows but even though we've got Wake and Shilling for decent money I look at the rotation right now and see Beckett as the Ace with Dice-K as a #3 caliber player in the #2 spot (though I'm hoping we'll see improvement next year.)

Everyone else in the rotation strikes me as a #4 starter. So I actually do feel like we could shore up the starting pitching.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

I'm not going to argue the point of whether or not Santana would make the Red Sox better, because I don't think there's much of an argument.

The more important argument is how much better off the Sox would be. Right now, the order looks to be something like Beckett-Matsuzaka-Schilling-Lester/Buchholz-Wakefield. Obviously, Beckett-Santana-Matsuzaka-Schilling-Wakefield would be better, but how many games better? 2? 5? 10? Also, and perhaps more importantly, since Schilling and Wakefield won't be around too much longer, keeping Lester and Buchholz would make filling out the roster in '09 and '10 easier. Also, as someone pointed out, what happens with Beckett in '09 if the Sox bring in Santana?

 

[BradyManny]

I'm not going to argue the point of whether or not Santana would make the Red Sox better, because I don't think there's much of an argument.

The more important argument is how much better off the Sox would be. Right now, the order looks to be something like Beckett-Matsuzaka-Schilling-Lester/Buchholz-Wakefield. Obviously, Beckett-Santana-Matsuzaka-Schilling-Wakefield would be better, but how many games better? 2? 5? 10? Also, and perhaps more importantly, since Schilling and Wakefield won't be around too much longer, keeping Lester and Buchholz would make filling out the roster in '09 and '10 easier. Also, as someone pointed out, what happens with Beckett in '09 if the Sox bring in Santana?

I don't think a trade of Buccholz/Ellsbury/Lester for Santana makes us better at all. We weaken ourselves tremendously in CF and in 2 spots in the rotation to upgrade our one starting position. With a team that scores as many runs as we do, over the course of a season, a guy with a 4.5 ERA very well win as many games as a guy with a 3.5 ERA. What I'm saying is this: we have our ace (Beckett), we have three other potential aces (DiceK, Buccholz and to a much lesser extent, Lester), that's good enough for me. Pitching isn't a need, so why give up 3 cost-controlled, young, potential stars for 1 megastar who will cost a fortune and who just had the least amazing season in his career? Don't get me wrong, Santana had an awesome season in 07, but we're trading and paying for the Santana who puts up the numbers he did between 02-06, if we paid the hefty price for Santana in both prospects and money and he came over and gave up 33 HRs, posted a 3.33 ERA and went 15-13, I'd be rip****.

PS, Santana has a career ERA over 6 in Fenway.

 

[Patsfanin Philly]

I don't think a trade of Buccholz/Ellsbury/Lester for Santana makes us better at all.*.

PS, Santana has a career ERA over 6 in Fenway.

He'll be 29 by opening day and has thrown over 210 innings th elast 5 years. He is waiting to break down/wear out. I wouldn't give the farm ( literally ) to get him. Maybe at trading deadline next year but let the others weaken themselves.....

 

[JoeSixPat]

I don't think a trade of Buccholz/Ellsbury/Lester for Santana makes us better at all. We weaken ourselves tremendously in CF and in 2 spots in the rotation to upgrade our one starting position. With a team that scores as many runs as we do, over the course of a season, a guy with a 4.5 ERA very well win as many games as a guy with a 3.5 ERA. What I'm saying is this: we have our ace (Beckett), we have three other potential aces (DiceK, Buccholz and to a much lesser extent, Lester), that's good enough for me. Pitching isn't a need, so why give up 3 cost-controlled, young, potential stars for 1 megastar who will cost a fortune and who just had the least amazing season in his career? Don't get me wrong, Santana had an awesome season in 07, but we're trading and paying for the Santana who puts up the numbers he did between 02-06, if we paid the hefty price for Santana in both prospects and money and he came over and gave up 33 HRs, posted a 3.33 ERA and went 15-13, I'd be rip****. .

I draw the line at giving up Ellsbury - but apparently that's what the Twins are demanding (wait, I thought they have no interest in trading Santana?!)

As far as whether Santana is "worth" it, its really a question of giving up potential for proven.

I don't think I've heard anyone use the term "potential ace" with Lester or even Bucholz, no hitter not withstanding... if anything that puts him in a long list of no-hitter pitchers who never amounted to anything else.

As was pointed out Santana had an excellent '07. Of course looking at his ERA he also had an excellent '06...

and '05
and '04
and '03
and '02

Is anyone else detecting a trend?

Additionally, the Yankees don't just want Santana - they NEED him. Without him they really have no ace... so yes, like Theo, I do factor in the "twofer" factor of making our team stronger and the only competition that can spend anywhere near as much as us, weaker.

Bottom line, I'm fine if they don't trade for Santana, but I see the good sense of giving up potential players for a proven second Ace on our staff as well.

 

[scout]

I'm with you Joe, I also draw the line with Ellsbury. This kid will be an everyday player who will hit over 300, steal lots of bases, and score when others wouldn't. If he's not a gold glover, it will because someone is having an outstanding year, not because of his abilities. Would anyone trade Fred Lynn in his prime for Santana? Yes, I'm comparing Ellsbury to Lynn. Not as much power, tho, I think he'll provide more then he's shown. Its the speed which is going to make opposing pitchers not want to face him.

 

[Foley]

Just out of curiosity, what do people expect out of Ellsbury versus what you expect out of Buchholz, both next year and in their careers? Difficult to project, obviously, but just your opinion.

 

[groundgame]

One of the 3 rookies (of the Bucholtz/Lester/Ellsbury trio) I think the one player that is probably out of the Sox-Twins trade mix is John Lester. I think the Sox would be extremely reluctant to trade the young lefty (or the Twins taking him as the main asset) just as things are calming down from the very stressful (health) past 16 months he has endured. That leaves the Sox with Bucholtz and Ellsbury to offer as main their main chips, which they won't do. Compromise: After adding in Crisp to Bucholtz etc., offer to pay-down (give to Twins as bonus) Crisp's salary by $3M for each for 3 years to sweeten pot by effectively giving MINN $9,000,000. Now the Twins have an experienced player at close to 2nd year player pay.

 

[BradyManny]

I don't think I've heard anyone use the term "potential ace" with Lester or even Bucholz, no hitter not withstanding... if anything that puts him in a long list of no-hitter pitchers who never amounted to anything else.

As was pointed out Santana had an excellent '07. Of course looking at his ERA he also had an excellent '06...

I think pre-cancer, Lester's upside was as high as an ace. He's always had control issues, but his velocity is naturally lot higher than it's been in his MLB career as he was fighting and recovering from a disease. Now that his body is starting to get back to the point it was, we're seeing his potential, as we did in the playoffs.

As for Buchholz, I definitely think his upside is ace, and have read that many times.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=6902

"Perfect World Projection: Buchholz is one of the few pitching prospects around with true ace potential."

I understand this isn't a perfect world, so maybe he doesn't pan out as an ace. But maybe he's hovering around a 4 ERA. From a value standpoint, paying him peanuts to do that job and having the ability to control him indefinitely is huge.

As for Santana, my point about his 07 is that he went from lights-out to really great. There's a difference. His ERA, WHIP, BAA, OBP, SLG, OPS, HRS & BB all went up and his IP and wins declined. So while there's a very thin line between the 2.6-2.8 ERA, .9-1 WHIP guy and the 3.33 ERA 1.07 WHIP, 33 HR guy last year, it's still a line. And ultimately, we'd be paying the price in both money and prospects for the guy who is a guaranteed sub 3 ERA guy.

 

[BradyManny]

Just out of curiosity, what do people expect out of Ellsbury versus what you expect out of Buchholz, both next year and in their careers? Difficult to project, obviously, but just your opinion.

Personally, if I had to trade one, it'd be Ellsbury. Buchholz is a potential ace, Ellsbury is a potential Damon. The pitching is more valuable. Personally, I'd rather trade neither. Their price, the fact that the Sox control them for a long time, it's too important. We're coming off a World Series victory and we have 3 ML ready prospects ready to contribute - they may very well dictate the team's upside, but so be it.

If the team's floor is World Series contender and it's ceiling is these 3 guys turning into stars and making us that much better, then I really don't see the need to trade for a guy who will cost 1-3 of these three players AND $150 mill. It's OK to let other teams have amazing players, we can't get them all.

Another factor to consider is that Drew is likely going to have a much better season and return to career norms, ditto for Lugo; both Manny and Ortiz should hopefully be healthier and more productive and Ellsbury should be a considerable improvement over Crisp. The team is going to get better without doing much of anything.

 

[FreeTedWilliams]

I figure I would put my two cents in so that if I'm right later on, I can revert to this post......

Santana is an absolute Stud! I know that his numbers last year were not that impressive, but that has more to do with Cleveland's pitching (he was 0-5) than his pitching.

I watch alot of minor league baseball on here (We have the Mets class A team (and they suck)), and I saw Hanley Ramirez coming up through the minors and knew that he was going to be a player, and we all felt a little sick, after his won ROY, and Anibal Sanchez threw a no-hitter, but we forgot all about that watching Beckett have the most impressive playoff run since Orel Herschier (plus Lowell).

That being said, I would hate to see Ellsbury and Lester get traded. Before Ellsbury got inserted into the line-up, the Sox were down 1-3 to the Indians, and still have not lost a game since!!!

I watched Lester make a very impressive rehab start here in Savannah last summer. He has all the makings of an Andy Petitie. He must have broken ten bats in one game. I think that he is also going to be a very good MLB pitcher.

I have no problem trading Bucholtz in any deal for Santana. But I would hate to see both Buchotlz and Ellsbury go for Santana.

of course, all trades are contigent upon Sanata first signing an extention with the Sox.

I think that the trade that both sides could agree on is Buchotlz, Lester, and Crisp for Santana. It is a high price to pay, but it will be worth it, to get Santana, and let's face it, keep him away from the Yankees (I would hate to have to face him, in Yankee stadium, a few times a year).

I would not trade Ellsbury, period.

 

[scout]

Did anyone see the play, when Ellsbury scored from second on a passed ball? I'm curious as to whether he had a large lead, the play at the plate, or anything you can tell me. I thought Carl Crawford's scoring from second on a sacrafice fly was the bomb, but this tops it. BTW, do not trade this guy. He's not Damon, he's Freddy Lynn.

 

[frankiesfly]

I wouldn't even do that deal. Santana is a year away from the open market. He's going to cost $25 mill a year. To me, that alone is a high enough price to consider passing, then when you're talking about giving up some of your best prospects who are MLB ready (some who are already contributing, Buccholz/Ellsbury), that just makes no sense when you're team is just coming off winning the WS.

I don't understand this mindset that we have to snatch up every great player available at all costs. Let Santana continue being one of the best MLB pitchers on another team and we can continue to win World Series.

You're right. It looks like the Red Sox are trying to take over the Yanks as the next evil empire.

 

[FreeTedWilliams]

Here's the latest............

From the ST. Paul
http://www.twincities.com/walters

A little birdie says the Boston Red Sox have become the favorite in the Johan Santana trade sweepstakes.

The Twins would receive four players for the Twins' two-time Cy Young Award winner, including center fielder Coco Crisp, 28.

Others would be shortstop prospect Jed Lowry, 23; left-handed pitcher Jon Lester, 23; and right-handed pitcher Justin Masterson, 22.

Before a deal could be made, the Red Sox would have to have time to negotiate a contract extension with Santana, 28, who can become a free agent after next season and could have a market value as high as $150 million over six years.

Lowry did not play in the major leagues this year but is considered ready and is a good-fielding shortstop who also can hit. Lowry had a slugging percentage of .500 at Class AA and Class AAA this year.

Lester made a comeback from non-Hodgkin's lymphoma a year ago and is said to be cancer-free.

Masterson, 6 feet 6, 245 pounds, had 59 strikeouts in 58 innings at Class AA Portland.

SWEEEEETTTTTT

Get Santana WITHOUT LOSING EITHER ELLSBURY OR BUCHOLTZ!!!!

Do it NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[VJCPatriot]

If that is the deal, I would absolutely do it right now. If this happens, the Red Sox will have successfully negotiated highway robbery!!

Here's the latest............

From the ST. Paul
http://www.twincities.com/walters

A little birdie says the Boston Red Sox have become the favorite in the Johan Santana trade sweepstakes.

The Twins would receive four players for the Twins' two-time Cy Young Award winner, including center fielder Coco Crisp, 28.

Others would be shortstop prospect Jed Lowry, 23; left-handed pitcher Jon Lester, 23; and right-handed pitcher Justin Masterson, 22.

Before a deal could be made, the Red Sox would have to have time to negotiate a contract extension with Santana, 28, who can become a free agent after next season and could have a market value as high as $150 million over six years.

Lowry did not play in the major leagues this year but is considered ready and is a good-fielding shortstop who also can hit. Lowry had a slugging percentage of .500 at Class AA and Class AAA this year.

Lester made a comeback from non-Hodgkin's lymphoma a year ago and is said to be cancer-free.

Masterson, 6 feet 6, 245 pounds, had 59 strikeouts in 58 innings at Class AA Portland.

SWEEEEETTTTTT

Get Santana WITHOUT LOSING EITHER ELLSBURY OR BUCHOLTZ!!!!

Do it NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[BradyManny]

Wow, I'd be surprised if that was the trade.

It'd actually be fair for both sides, but it would be a steal from the Sox side in the sense that Lowrie has no spot on this team for at least 3 years (unless we ship Lugo), and Crisp is a 4th outfielder to us.

I'd hate to lose Lester, if for nothing more than sentimental reasons.

Still, based on principle, my objection to the trade persists. There's something to be said for growing and developing talent and mixing it with proven vets. We have that mix already, we are coming off a World Series victory, and this trade would put that mix in jeopardy, upset the balance. The last thing we want to do is to become the Yankees.

The Yankees became a dynasty thanks to some homegrown talent, they've become an overpriced laughing stock b/c they felt the need to suck up every proven talent at whatever cost. It's not a business model you want to follow.

 

[Foley]

Personally, if I had to trade one, it'd be Ellsbury. Buchholz is a potential ace, Ellsbury is a potential Damon. The pitching is more valuable. Personally, I'd rather trade neither. Their price, the fact that the Sox control them for a long time, it's too important. We're coming off a World Series victory and we have 3 ML ready prospects ready to contribute - they may very well dictate the team's upside, but so be it.

I completely agree. I like Ellsbury and wouldn't want to trade him, but if the deal came down to one or the other I would much rather keep Buccholz, and the choice isn't even close. Ellsbury's numbers are that of a very good CF. Buchholz's numbers are that of an ace. Buchholz has better numbers across the board in the minors than Papelbon, and pretty much any other Sox pitching prospect since Clemens. Unless Buchholz plays well below his minor league stats while Ellsbury plays well above his, Buchholz should be the more valuable player.

He's not Damon, he's Freddy Lynn.

Why do you think this? Ellsbury has hit a total of 13HR since joining the Red Sox organization in 2005. His power may improve, but what gives you the indication that he'd ever hit more than 15HR a season, or that he'd ever come close to the 25 a season that Lynn averaged? Ellsbury should be a very good player, but they have two very different skill sets.

 

[VJCPatriot]

I think people are underestimating the value of Ellsbury. He doesn't need to hit for tremendous power to make an impact. He is a legit leadoff hitter. Did you see what him and Pedroia did to the Rockies as a 1-2 combo? It was ridiculous.

Ellsbury has the patience to be a true leadoff hitter, he has bat skills, and he has the speed to turn any blooper into a hit. He can steal bases, he can field nearly as well as Crisp (a gold glover), he's the complete package as a #1 hitter. If I would compare him, it would be to Grady Sizemore.

I wouldn't move Buchholz or Ellsbury. I would move Lester and Crisp though.

I'd trade Lester because Santanna is a lefty, and it's probably a bad idea to have too much left handed starting pitching. Lester is more proven anyways, so why not hold onto our players with potential? We're already getting a sure thing in Santanna.

Masterson is a tough prospect to lose for Santanna, but if it means we don't give up Ellsbury or Buccholz, I say do it.
http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/articles/2007/07/27/hes_gaining_in_arms_race/

Lowrie doesn't sound like a special player, but a good young shortstop always holds some value, I would think.
http://www.soxprospects.com/players/lowrie-jed.htm