Minnesota Twins News & Rumors Forum
Page 4 of 13 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 250

Thread: Heyman: The Twins made a 3-year offer to Ervin Santana

  1. #61
    Owner MVP Brock Beauchamp's Avatar
    Posts
    8,105
    Twitter
    @rocketpig76
    Like
    48
    Liked 1,584 Times in 822 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by mike wants wins View Post
    I'd sign them both, if you sign one...sign the other.

    If they do sign Santana, we can only hope Gibson looks great, and is turned into a SS or C or something. Would you trade Gibson to Houston for their catcher, for example?

    I would do this under the assumption that Meyer will be ready this year, and others in 2-3 years.
    Trading Gibson would be a mistake. His stock is at an all-time low right now. It makes far more sense to just wave goodbye to Diamond, Worley, and Deduno and don't look back.

  2. #62
    Senior Member MVP
    Posts
    5,713
    Like
    1,159
    Liked 564 Times in 369 Posts
    I did say "hope he looks great", didn't I?

    Santana, Hughes, Nolasco, Meyer, random guy, backed up by someone in AAA until Stewart and Berrios are up in 2-3 years.

    I am a huge Gibson fan, that should be obvious on my statements around the Pelfrey signing and how they did not call him up last year. But if you have the guys above, and Pelfrey, and HUGE GAPING HOLES at SS and DH and C.....and you can get a legit player for him (hence the "hope he looks great" part of my post), then why not? Where are you getting your SS or DH or C from?

    Sure, in an ideal world, you cut that chaffe, but then what? Gibson sits in AAA with Meyer and May and the other guys?

    Sign Santana, Sign Drew, in 1-2 monts deal Gibson for Houston's catcher they won't pay soon.....that team might actually compete, and you still have Meyer in AAA, and probably a couple of AAAA starters if/when one of the players breaks down.
    Lighten up Francis....

  3. #63
    Senior Member All-Star JB_Iowa's Avatar
    Posts
    3,309
    Like
    1,296
    Liked 1,274 Times in 738 Posts
    I love these little speculative things (gotta have something to entertain when there isn't a game):



  4. #64
    Owner MVP Brock Beauchamp's Avatar
    Posts
    8,105
    Twitter
    @rocketpig76
    Like
    48
    Liked 1,584 Times in 822 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by mike wants wins View Post
    I did say "hope he looks great", didn't I?

    Santana, Hughes, Nolasco, Meyer, random guy, backed up by someone in AAA until Stewart and Berrios are up in 2-3 years.

    I am a huge Gibson fan, that should be obvious on my statements around the Pelfrey signing and how they did not call him up last year. But if you have the guys above, and Pelfrey, and HUGE GAPING HOLES at SS and DH and C.....and you can get a legit player for him (hence the "hope he looks great" part of my post), then why not? Where are you getting your SS or DH or C from?

    Sure, in an ideal world, you cut that chaffe, but then what? Gibson sits in AAA with Meyer and May and the other guys?

    Sign Santana, Sign Drew, in 1-2 monts deal Gibson for Houston's catcher they won't pay soon.....that team might actually compete, and you still have Meyer in AAA, and probably a couple of AAAA starters if/when one of the players breaks down.
    If Gibson looks great in ST, his stock doesn't change.

    If Gibson looks great in Rochester, his stock doesn't change much.

    If Gibson looks great in MLB early this season, then it doesn't make sense to trade him.

    I don't see a situation where it makes sense to trade Gibson. It makes far more sense to clear out the out of options players and trade Correia.

  5. This user likes Brock Beauchamp's post and wants to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    tobi0040 (03-10-2014)

  6. #65
    Twins News Team All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,819
    Like
    175
    Liked 661 Times in 373 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by cmathewson View Post
    Doumit is no great loss. Odds are pretty good they'll get better production out of those 538 PAs.
    Last year C/1B/DH was Mauer/Morneau/Doumit.

    This year it's Mauer/Suzuki/Kubel.

    I would not call odds "pretty good" that this group outproduces last year. Some of that depends on how long it's Suzuki/Kubel and not Pinto/Arcia but right now it looks like at least a decent chunk of the season will start that way.

  7. #66
    Twins News Team All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,819
    Like
    175
    Liked 661 Times in 373 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp View Post
    To be fair, I believe the Twins' interest in Saunders was described as "incredibly mild". From the report it sounded like a phone call, nothing more.
    That is fair and this could be the same thing. My preference, if they are going to make a signing of this ilk, would be to go with Morales or Drew instead. And I'm not a big fan of either of those guys, but it would make more sense for this team at this point IMO.

  8. #67
    Senior Member MVP
    Posts
    5,713
    Like
    1,159
    Liked 564 Times in 369 Posts
    For what you are getting for KC, you might as well just cut him if you sign Santana. And, we disagree on Gibson. If he dominates AAA for 2 months, his stock will be right back to 3/4 starter. But you aren't cutting Hughes, Santana, or Nolasco. You can't send Pelfrey down. Someone other than Gibson is your number 5 starter, probably, because they are totally afraid to lose all these guys out of options.

    Look, I'd love to keep him. Don't know who your SS or C of the future are though.....
    Lighten up Francis....

  9. #68
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,124
    Like
    100
    Liked 271 Times in 195 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp View Post
    If Gibson looks great in ST, his stock doesn't change.

    If Gibson looks great in Rochester, his stock doesn't change much.

    If Gibson looks great in MLB early this season, then it doesn't make sense to trade him.

    I don't see a situation where it makes sense to trade Gibson. It makes far more sense to clear out the out of options players and trade Correia.
    I agree with this assessment. I would hold onto Gibson. The issue is Gibson and Meyer are blocked by a series of pitchers with much lower ceilings. I think the plan with KC all along was to get a half year or year out of him and flip him. I kind of wonder if TR isn't thinking something similar with Pelfrey.

  10. #69
    Senior Member All-Star cmathewson's Avatar
    Posts
    2,271
    Like
    241
    Liked 461 Times in 290 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by mike wants wins View Post
    Someone other than Gibson is your number 5 starter, probably, because they are totally afraid to lose all these guys out of options. ..
    I wouldn't make that assumption. I'm sure they'd rather not lose them, but they have often DFA's guys who didn't fit. Their offseason investments suggest that they will take the best guys north. I have yet to hear anything from the Twins to the contrary.
    "If you'da been thinkin' you wouldn't 'a thought that.."

  11. #70
    Senior Member All-Star Jim Crikket's Avatar
    Posts
    1,094
    Like
    15
    Liked 122 Times in 61 Posts
    Blog Entries
    77
    I guess I still feel the way I've felt all along. That is, if there's a deal out there that you feel improves your team either this year or in the future (preferably both), then you do the deal. I know some teams are reluctant to trade within their divisions, but I think that's kind of silly. The idea is to improve YOUR team, not worry so much about others. If you think a guy is so good that he's going to kill you as a member of another team, you don't trade him to ANYONE, you keep him. If you're willing to part with a guy who's out of options or is a marginal prospect, you shouldn't care who you trade him to as long as you get someone back that you feel is better for your team.

    I'm not a big Ervin Santana fan, at this point. I think last season was a bit of an aberation and I'm just not convinced he's really that great. I also think the offense needs more help than the rotation does, at this point, so I'd rather spend money on bats.

    That said, if the people running the team think Santana makes the Twins better, then pay what it takes to get him. Quit screwing around and finishing 2nd in the bidding for these guys.
    I opine about the Twins and Kernels regularly at Knuckleballsblog.com while my alter ego, SD Buhr covers the Kernels for MetroSportsReport.com.

    ~You can get anything you want at Alice's Restaurant~

  12. These 2 users like Jim Crikket's post and want to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    mike wants wins (03-10-2014), USAFChief (03-10-2014)

  13. #71
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    400
    Like
    68
    Liked 68 Times in 47 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by JB_Iowa View Post
    This is the first time I've seen a number. According to this report, the Twins' offer was about 3 years/$30 million to $33 million.

    http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/s...no-lock-030914




    That seems conservative to me. Assuming Santana believes he will be healthy, I don't know why he wouldn't go with one of the 1-year offers.
    Yeah the money and years have to be lower than he would like. However if he has a bad year or blows his arm out on a 1 Year deal then he will lose that gamble. That is why it seems players almost always take the deal with the most years even if it is less money per year.

    If I had to guess I would say Santana feels like he is a better pitcher than Nolasco and Ricky got 4 years at 12 million per year with an option on a 5th year. My guess is it takes a deal similar to that to get him. I think there is too much past inconsistency and potential injury concerns to go there though. Personally I like the Twins offer and I think it is fair to both sides as he does come with risk over the three years.

    If I were him I would take the years but it would say something for him to go out on a limb bet on himself and come out better financially next year. Unless of course he doesn't pitch well or gets injured and he comes back on a Pelfrey type deal. Then he loses big time.

    I don't think the Twins will be the only team to offer him multiple years but I don't think he will reach Nolasco's numbers.
    Last edited by Dman; 03-10-2014 at 09:43 AM.

  14. #72
    Senior Member All-Star JB_Iowa's Avatar
    Posts
    3,309
    Like
    1,296
    Liked 1,274 Times in 738 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Dman View Post
    If I had to guess I would say Santana feels like he is a better pitcher than Nolasco and Ricky got 4 years at 12 million per year with an option on a 5th year. My guess is it takes a deal similar to that to get him. I think there is too much past inconsistency and potential injury concerns to go there though. .
    I think he very well may have gotten that type of deal if that is where his (and his negotiating team's) sights were set at the beginning of the off-season. But his team had their sights in the clouds -- apparently thinking about $100 million over 5 years according to Rosenthal (http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/20...n-100-million/). Nolasco was reportedly looking at $80 million over the same time frame. (Even though we all know that agents blow smoke at the beginning of the off-season, $100 million is a long way from $52 million).

    But Nolasco got realistic quickly and got ahead of the market. It is pretty apparent that Santana's team misjudged the market by waiting for the Tanaka dust to settle and perhaps by failing to consider the real impact of draft pick compensation.

    While it is easy to say that his negotiating team screwed up, there is still the player's ego involved and perceiving himself as "as good as" or better than Nolasco so asking him to take 3/$33m now would be a really bitter pill to swallow.

    He's being asked to take significantly less than Nolasco and to take something that was probably not even in the realm of his possiiblities when the off-season started.

    Given that, I still believe that he will sign a one-year deal unless the 3 year money gets more in the range of $39-40 million. Less than that is asking him to take a paycut from his 2013 numbers.

    I'm not saying the Twins should do this -- I'm not even totally convinced that they should do it at 3/$33m but I think that's what it is going to take (if not more).
    Last edited by JB_Iowa; 03-10-2014 at 10:06 AM.

  15. #73
    This deal is reportedly still on the table, which is interesting considering we have heard he wants a 1 year deal. If he signs here (which is not likely to happen and we are all probably all wasting our time) the rotation for 2015 could be literally one of the best in baseball.

    Meyer
    Nolasco
    Santana
    Hughes
    Pelfrey/May

    That rotation could honestly lead a team to a championship. I would be good with this deal if it somehow happens.

  16. #74
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    284
    Like
    9
    Liked 39 Times in 27 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    I'd certainly do it if he would take 3/$33 or $36. You cannot have enough starting pitching as we have seen over the past couple of years. I would see Santana as an upgrade on Correia and this signing would push Correia out faster, especially if he continues his good spring.

  17. #75
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,124
    Like
    100
    Liked 271 Times in 195 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5
    On a side note, why would the Blue Jays go 1/14 on Santana and give up a draft pick? It doesn't seem to make any sense to me. If you get the guy for 3 or more years it is probably worth it. But do they think they are going to compete next year? The Orioles may make a run at the division so I get it from there perspective.

  18. This user likes tobi0040's post and wants to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    birdwatcher (03-10-2014)

  19. #76
    Owner MVP Brock Beauchamp's Avatar
    Posts
    8,105
    Twitter
    @rocketpig76
    Like
    48
    Liked 1,584 Times in 822 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by tobi0040 View Post
    On a side note, why would the Blue Jays go 1/14 on Santana and give up a draft pick? It doesn't seem to make any sense to me. If you get the guy for 3 or more years it is probably worth it. But do they think they are going to compete next year? The Orioles may make a run at the division so I get it from there perspective.
    My thoughts exactly. The Orioles have already given up picks, may as well push all the chips to the center of the table at this point.

    But the Jays? I don't get that at all.

  20. #77
    Senior Member All-Star Thrylos's Avatar
    Posts
    4,171
    Twitter
    @thrylos98
    Like
    36
    Liked 446 Times in 273 Posts
    Blog Entries
    200
    Quote Originally Posted by mike wants wins View Post
    If they do sign Santana, we can only hope Gibson looks great, and is turned into a SS or C or something. Would you trade Gibson to Houston for their catcher, for example?
    Here is the question one should ask: Would you rather have Santana in his age 31-33 seasons or Gibson in his age 25-30 seasons plus $33M. Santana has been a (fairly) consistent 4.19/4.36/4.24 (ERA/FIP/xFIP) pitcher. Other than his 6 WAR 2008 season, he has been averaging close to 2 WAR a season (career 1.7 fWAR). This is Kevin Correia territory (4.18/4.40/4.24 ERA/FIP/xFIP and 1.3 fWAR in 2013 for the Twins).

    Do you think that Gibson can do better the next 3 (+2) seasons? I do...
    Last edited by Thrylos; 03-10-2014 at 10:40 AM.
    -----
    Blogging Twins since 2007 at The Tenth Inning Stretch
    http://tenthinningstretch.blogspot.com/
    twitter: @thrylos98

  21. This user likes Thrylos's post and wants to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    Hosken Bombo Disco (03-10-2014)

  22. #78
    Quote Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp View Post

    But the Jays? I don't get that at all.
    IIRC the Jays have two first-round picks in this year's draft and at least one is protected, if not both.
    That plus the idea that they suffered bad luck last year and could bounce back to contend with better pitching makes me kind of see their reasoning.

  23. #79
    Senior Member MVP
    Posts
    5,713
    Like
    1,159
    Liked 564 Times in 369 Posts
    If I thought they'd spend that money, and could get a SS or C in FA or whatever, sure, I think I'd rather have Gibson. But that has not yet been their model, other than 1 outlier year. They needed a SS and a C this year, had plenty of money, and signed Suzuki.
    Lighten up Francis....

  24. #80
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    400
    Like
    68
    Liked 68 Times in 47 Posts
    Given that, I still believe that he will sign a one-year deal unless the 3 year money gets more in the range of $39-40 million. Less than that is asking him to take a paycut from his 2013 numbers.

    I'm not saying the Twins should do this -- I'm not even totally convinced that they should do it at 3/$33m but I think that's what it is going to take (if not more).
    I agree with your analysis on Santana. You would have to swallow hard to take a pay cut after the year he just had. He can't really afford to do that thus a one year deal would be the only way out. I think if the draft wasn't so deep this year he might have had more competition for services.

    Maybe someone will jump in last minute like Milwaukee did and get him numbers that are closer to what he can accept. I like your three year 40 million and above range as doable for him.

    I agree with you that I don't know if I want him or not. If he pitches like last year two out of the three years I would give him a 3 year 40 million contract for sure. If he regresses closer to some of his worse years then no thanks I prefer to go with someone else next year or a young guy from AAA.

Page 4 of 13 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
©2014 TwinsCentric, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Interested in advertising with Twins Daily? Click here.