Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

Recent Blogs

Photo

Article: The Twins Should Be Shopping Ervin Santana

ervin santana
  • Please log in to reply
127 replies to this topic

#21 ashburyjohn

ashburyjohn

    Haighters gonna Haight

  • Twins Mods
  • 19,866 posts
  • LocationNatick, MA

Posted 29 November 2017 - 08:34 AM

They havea team option that vests with 200 IP in 2018 for $14M. 

Something I've occasionally wondered is whether the team has any choice, if the option doesn't vest. Say he pitches 165 innings but the team is happy with him and wants to pay the $14M for the next season, can they execute the option anyway, or is the option voided automatically and negotiation goes like for any free agent?

Trust everybody ... then cut the cards.


#22 Penthang

Penthang

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 79 posts

Posted 29 November 2017 - 08:39 AM

I am not a huge fan of this idea but in certain circumstances could see it making sense. If the Twins have already acquired 2 rotation pieces and trading Santana can bring them a closer then yes, I’d go for that. I believe they are targeting Darvish as an incentive for Ohtani and if that gets them both players then great. If they sign Darvish and don’t get Ohtani, then try trading Santana for a younger pitcher with some controllable years they will have to throw in something else. If that something else is one of our top tier pitching prospects then I’d be solidly aigainst it. That would be to high a cost for anyone not the next Kershaw(I’d be ok with that if it was for Kershaw).

--Twins Fan From Texas


#23 drjim

drjim

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 8,783 posts
  • LocationSt. Paul

Posted 29 November 2017 - 08:45 AM

 

Something I've occasionally wondered is whether the team has any choice, if the option doesn't vest. Say he pitches 165 innings but the team is happy with him and wants to pay the $14M for the next season, can they execute the option anyway, or is the option voided automatically and negotiation goes like for any free agent?

 

It is a team option, so Twins have control. It is automatically exercised if he hits 200 ip next year. $1mil buyout.

 

I would add, if Santana hits 200 ip next year, $14mil for 2019 will not be a burden (barring a massive injury after he hits the 200 ip mark).

  • gunnarthor, Oldgoat_MN, Vanimal46 and 1 other like this
Papers...business papers.

#24 Thrylos

Thrylos

    Twins World Champions in 2019

  • Members
  • 9,726 posts
  • LocationLehigh Valley, PA, USA
  • Twitter: thrylos98

Posted 29 November 2017 - 08:50 AM

 

Something I've occasionally wondered is whether the team has any choice, if the option doesn't vest. Say he pitches 165 innings but the team is happy with him and wants to pay the $14M for the next season, can they execute the option anyway, or is the option voided automatically and negotiation goes like for any free agent?

 

It is a team option that the Twins can pick up for $14M or buy it out for $1M.If he pitches 200+ innings, it will automatically vest and cannot be bought out. The Twins are in for $1M for 2019 as is, and they can pick it up for $14M even if he is on the DL the whole season (not that I wish him that.) 

Edited by Thrylos, 29 November 2017 - 08:50 AM.

  • gagu likes this
-----
Blogging Twins since 2007 at The Tenth Inning Stretch
http://tenthinningst...h.blogspot.com/
twitter: @thrylos98

#25 Tomj14

Tomj14

    Chattanooga Lookouts

  • Members
  • 564 posts

Posted 29 November 2017 - 09:28 AM

I don't understand the logic in trading Santana unless it is just one move in a series of moves.

and the option year shouldn't matter, except that the Twins should hope he is good enough to pitch 200 innings and we get a decent pitcher for 14 million the following year which I guarantee we couldn't get back on the open market.

Cobb has never pitched 200 innings and Lynn twice (202,204)

 

Edited by Tomj14, 29 November 2017 - 09:30 AM.

  • DJL44 likes this

#26 SarasotaBill

SarasotaBill

    Member

  • Members
  • 177 posts

Posted 29 November 2017 - 09:48 AM

Assumption - other GMs are not idiots. Other GMs understand good/bad seasons, peak and low values, and age affecting performance.

No one is trading younger pitching (close to the Majors) for Santana.

Santana has strong value for the Twins and you make a decision at the trading deadline when a contender may be desperate for a starter (see Garcia trade).  

  • Carole Keller, birdwatcher, Riverbrian and 3 others like this

#27 markos

markos

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,273 posts

Posted 29 November 2017 - 09:54 AM

 

The idea of trading off Santana doesn't make sense unless you think he'll turn into a pumpkin - in which case you should also think he has no trade value, esp to rebuilding teams that should horde younger players.

 

If you think Santana can pitch about 190 innings next year with a ERA+ of around 100 then you should keep him because we don't have five pitchers that will beat that. He's not blocking anyone and the Twins window is currently open. They shouldn't worry about 2019 when they should be worrying about 2018.

 

And if you think ownership is worried about paying a 36 year old pitcher 14m then how are you going to convince the same owner to pay Darvish 25m per year for his 35-37 years?

There is middle ground here. Even if the Twins are confident that Santana is going to produce ~190 innings with a 100 ERA+, they should do the due-diligence to see if any other team wants to bet that he will repeat his 210 inning, 130 ERA+ performance from last year, and they should price him accordingly. The Angels, Mariners, Orioles and Rangers are all in "win-now" mode with windows that are quickly closing, and they all desperately need starting pitching. If you could get Seattle, for example, to offer Kyle Lewis and Edwin Diaz, I think they should make that trade and try to replace Santana's innings with a mid-tier starter (someone like Vargas, Garcia or even Sabathia). 

 

Basically, I don't think Santana is untouchable, and the Twins should be confident in their own talent evaluations to take advantage if another team wildly overvalues one of their players.

  • birdwatcher and laloesch like this

#28 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 20,416 posts

Posted 29 November 2017 - 09:58 AM

I can't support trading Santana. He's the type of pitcher you can write 175+ IP in permanent ink on Opening Day. Sure, he's getting older and might regress but I don't care. $13m for 175 IP of 100 ERA+, I'll take it on this team every time. I don't care about 2019's salary right now, I want to see the Twins at least make the ALDS and Santana helps them reach that goal.

 

If you need to trade Santana to convince the Pohlads to take on Darvish, it's time to fire up Excel and show how much money they'll make with an 88-90 win season and 5-7 postseason games, never mind how that sets them up for 2019 sans Mauer and a growing season ticket base.

 

It's time to spend money on this team. Maybe not Darvish money but legit starting pitcher money.

  • birdwatcher, Jerr, DJSim22 and 5 others like this

#29 old nurse

old nurse

    Member

  • Members
  • 3,527 posts

Posted 29 November 2017 - 10:07 AM

Santana's peak value would be at the trade deadline. Any value would be because he is having a decent season and can be jettisoned at the end of the year. In terms of salary dollars having an affect on the Twins payroll for the year, I doubt there is enough pitching out there that the Twins could reasonably, or slightly unreasonably bid on and get to make it to the max that the Twins could spend.

  • SarasotaBill likes this

#30 Kelly Vance

Kelly Vance

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 470 posts

Posted 29 November 2017 - 10:47 AM

 

Not quite close: 

Santana 2017: 3.28 ERA, 4.46 FIP, 2.9 fWAR, 19.3 K%, 12.3 K/BB, 1.13 WHIP/ .245 BABIP, 10.1 SwStr%

FranKKKKie 2010: 3.62 ERA, 2.66 FIP, 5.7 fWAR, 24.9 K%, 17.7K/BB, 1.26 WHIP/ .331 BABIP, 12.5 SwStr%

 

That said, I totally agree with the rest:Santana needs to go.That ERA-FIP difference, the facts that he was not consistent but had an extremely unreliable June (6.03 ERA) and July (4.68 ERA), he is half a ligament away from disaster, and very likely his 2019 option will vest with IP in 2018, makes it a must to get him traded.Plus he chocked when it really mattered in the postseason.

 

Package him with Dozier and see what you get.

Sure, trade our best pitcher and most reliable power hitter over the past few years just to "see what you get?"  I'm pretty sure you were just thinking out loud,  but man. a team on the rise needs to keep its best players and build around them, not send them away. Besides, they are both clubhouse leaders.

  • birdwatcher, Jerr, gunnarthor and 3 others like this

#31 Kelly Vance

Kelly Vance

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 470 posts

Posted 29 November 2017 - 10:51 AM

Like death and taxes, it is a sure thing that Nick and I will disagree. No offense. 

Erv is our best pitcher and he is worth every penny. He may regress, but I remember several games where our BP blew his win in progress. He is an innings eater and when he is on he can throw a complete game... 7th in voting for Cy Young and was under rated at that. You bet on guys like that, not against them. I'd rather see him on the Twins, mentoring Gonsalves and Berios.  Plus there is a dynamic some never seem to take into consideration. That is, that we don't want a mercenary front office with no loyalty. If we want to attract FA players, it is better to show some loyalty to our guys. It is also a good way to keep our current guys from wanting to bail. Think Calvin Griffith's Waseca speech in reverse. 

  • laloesch, gagu, Don Walcott and 1 other like this

#32 blindeke

blindeke

    Member

  • Members
  • 333 posts

Posted 29 November 2017 - 11:28 AM

Thing is that $14M is not that bad for a decent FA starter. Shop him, sure and if you get a great offer, take it. But anyone they sign would be more expensive. The original Santana deal was a good one for the Twins!

  • Kelly Vance likes this

#33 Twins33

Twins33

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 456 posts

Posted 29 November 2017 - 11:53 AM

I'm on the side of keep him for now. If you get three starters in the offseason, then trade him. That is probably a less than 1% chance of happening.

Look at it again mid-season depending upon how the team is doing. I don't expect him to be a Twin in 2019. Just a gut feeling.

#34 wsnydes

wsnydes

    Winter baseball enthusiast

  • Members
  • 3,408 posts
  • LocationApple Valley

Posted 29 November 2017 - 12:25 PM

There really isn't much of a reason not to at least see what's out there, but they don't need to deal him.Even if they do, it needs to be the right deal and one of several others.Just like with Dozier last offseason, it can't be the only deal.There has to be other moves/signings to help build the major league squad and the upper minors.

 

All that said, I'm a firm believer that it's better to deal a guy a year too early than it is to deal him a year too late.The previous regime did the latter constantly and it hurt the franchise in the long run.Dealing Santana now is not a sign of perpetual rebuilding.If last years playoffs should have told people anything, it's that this team still has a long way to go to catch up to the real contenders.Some of that will be organic growth from within, some of it will have to come from elsewhere.The only guys that should be near off limits would be the young core four.Beyond that, I'd be listening.Just because you listen, it doesn't mean that you have to make a deal.

 

At this point in time though, I think they would be more prudent to hold on to him until at least the deadline.

"Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains." - Meat 


#35 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,851 posts
  • LocationTaiwan

Posted 29 November 2017 - 12:32 PM

 

Assumption - other GMs are not idiots. Other GMs understand good/bad seasons, peak and low values, and age affecting performance.

No one is trading younger pitching (close to the Majors) for Santana.

Santana has strong value for the Twins and you make a decision at the trading deadline when a contender may be desperate for a starter (see Garcia trade).  

This is the key point here. I really don't see the Twins getting a substantial offer for Santana and pretty much all they would get is salary relief. That could be important but this rotation needs more than just swapping the '#1' starter. 

 

But the bigger issue is that the Twins need to add 1 if not 2 good pitchers this offseason. Adding one (better pitcher) and subtracting one good pitcher doesn't really help.

 

I am not against trading Santana if there is a nice prospect or two but I think any Ervin trade would essentially be a salary dump for a minor prospect (top 100-ish). Other GM's know that he is 35 (next month) with poor SABR stats.

  • Carole Keller likes this

Is 2016 2017 2018 the year that a good pitching prospect is truly blocked by 5 good pitchers in the starting rotation? 

Offseason (noun) - a time to propose trades assuming opposing GM's can't do the same basic analysis


#36 Mike Sixel

Mike Sixel

    Now living in Oregon

  • Members
  • 27,321 posts

Posted 29 November 2017 - 12:53 PM

I think I keep him for now. Let's see where the team is at the deadline before trading off assets. This is, of course, assuming they don't sign O and D and need the money for RPs.......

 

I see a regression coming, and I see the team dealing him at the deadline. But, keeping the option open that they are good again has real value (in wins and losses, and ticket sales), and they should keep that value for now.

I remain hopeful on Buxton and Sano.....but I'd not bet the franchise on them.


#37 Hollywood42

Hollywood42

    Elizabethton

  • Members
  • 19 posts

Posted 29 November 2017 - 01:19 PM

 

Not quite close: 

Santana 2017: 3.28 ERA, 4.46 FIP, 2.9 fWAR, 19.3 K%, 12.3 K/BB, 1.13 WHIP/ .245 BABIP, 10.1 SwStr%

FranKKKKie 2010: 3.62 ERA, 2.66 FIP, 5.7 fWAR, 24.9 K%, 17.7K/BB, 1.26 WHIP/ .331 BABIP, 12.5 SwStr%

 

That said, I totally agree with the rest:Santana needs to go.That ERA-FIP difference, the facts that he was not consistent but had an extremely unreliable June (6.03 ERA) and July (4.68 ERA), he is half a ligament away from disaster, and very likely his 2019 option will vest with IP in 2018, makes it a must to get him traded.Plus he chocked when it really mattered in the postseason.

 

Package him with Dozier and see what you get.

 

Wha.... What? Now that we're finally a playoff team again, trade our arguably two best players? What?

  • USAFChief, birdwatcher, gunnarthor and 4 others like this

#38 laloesch

laloesch

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,708 posts

Posted 29 November 2017 - 01:41 PM

 

Like death and taxes, it is a sure thing that Nick and I will disagree. No offense. 

Erv is our best pitcher and he is worth every penny. 

 

Accept both he and Berrios can't beat the Yankees as evidence this year in the WC game.


#39 Riverbrian

Riverbrian

    Goofy Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 19,822 posts
  • LocationGrand Forks, ND

Posted 29 November 2017 - 02:09 PM

It's pretty simple for me. 

 

If the front office has 2019 circled... they lose me immediately. 

 

1. The 2017 Momentum needs to be augmented and supported with pitching to match. 

2. The Tigers, White Sox and Royals look promising for down years. Maybe big down years. 

3. The Majority of American League Teams appear to be lacking a roster full of capable arms. Capable Arms may be a huge advantage. 

 

The door is open... they better walk through the door in 2018 and not wait until 2019 to see if it leads to a different room because ... well... it will be a different room and that may not be good. 

 

It is not the time to move vets who produce for younger players who haven't produced yet but maybe will later. 

 

Santana, Berrios plus Darvish? -- Plus? 

 

Strengh in numbers!

 

It's time to spend... Mr. Pohlad... It's time to spend. 

 

  • Don Walcott likes this

A Skeleton walks into a bar and says... "Give me a beer... And a mop".

 

President of the "Baseball Player Positional Flexibility" Club 

Founded 4-23-16 

 

Strike Zone Automation Advocate


#40 jimmer

jimmer

    A former AF SNCO who values integrity.

  • Members
  • 10,212 posts

Posted 29 November 2017 - 02:17 PM

Ervin's year wasn't spectacular. Our standards are just low. It wasnt even as good as it was in 2016. Yes he finished 7th in CY voting. He got 3 points cause 3 voters gave him a 5th place finish (5th place vote gets one point) At least one of the voters was a Minnesota writer. I imagine one of the other two was the Minnesota writer.

And Ervin's year was not arguably better than any Twin starter since Johan left. Phil Hughes had a much, MUCH, better season in 2014 and wasnt helped by having a real low .248 babip like Ervin was. Hughes' babip in 2014 was over .320. Sure, Hughes' season was a major outlier for him and he was never going to repeat it, but it DID happen. And,as someone else mentioned, Lirano in 2010. Both much better than Ervins 2017.

I like Ervin and he's a fine low 2, high 3 pitcher. There is value there, but its hard to imagine his decline stopping. I've been recommending trade since trade deadline 2016. His value only drops as he gets older and his years of control at a great price gets shorter.

Edited by jimmer, 29 November 2017 - 02:45 PM.

  • laloesch likes this



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: ervin santana