Jump to content

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

Article: The Twins Should Be Shopping Ervin Santana

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

#41 gagu

gagu

    Elizabethton

  • Members
  • 44 posts
  • LocationLimache, Chile

Posted 29 November 2017 - 02:32 PM

I don't thinjk the contract clause is much of a factor. Santana has logged 200+ innings twice in the past six seasons. If he regresses more than expected I don't see much chance that he locks in. If Ervin is trending 200 in late August, it probably will mean that he still has it. If his arm goes south, shows it's age, late in the season, it would be logical that his workload would decrease. There would be no need pull him early to prevent him from locking in. Point is, Ervin's history shows that he is a steal at $13/14 million when he is able to pitch 200 innings. 

  • gunnarthor likes this

#42 Nick Nelson

Nick Nelson

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 3,342 posts

Posted 29 November 2017 - 02:55 PM

 

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.

Those are fine arguments, and I'd probably be inclined to agree, but they're not definitive by any means. I'd say Hughes and Liriano pitched better but they did not stack up in terms of results. Santana has both of them beat in IP, ERA, WHIP, CG, shutouts, etc. Was an All Star and got a bunch of CY votes.

 

I'm a fan of using peripherals and fielding-independent numbers for predictive purposes, but when we're assessing a guy's season in retrospect I think it's fair to just judge him by what he accomplished on the field. And from that standpoint, Erv's 2017 was arguably (maybe even unarguably) the best for a Twin since Johan's 2006.

  • Don Walcott likes this

#43 Danchat

Danchat

    Pro Bowl Armchair QB

  • Members
  • 3,147 posts

Posted 29 November 2017 - 03:08 PM

I would be OK with a Santana trade if:

 

1 - The return is good and the Twins get player(s) that can contribute within the next year or so.

2 - The rotation has been filled with new/better options, not having Gibson and May/Gonsalves penciled in

3 - The FO is convinced Santana is going to regress harshly

 

The chances that all three of these combine is very unlikely, so I don't see a trade happening. But I could very well see Santana regress big time and post a 5.00+ ERA in 2018. Hopefully this doesn't happen and Santana can be a solid #2/3 starter as they push for the playoffs again in 2018.

I recently attempted to calculate WAR in the NFL over on Purple Pain forums. Click here to check out my article.


#44 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 19,738 posts

Posted 29 November 2017 - 03:25 PM

 

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.

I agree with the bolded but the rest kind of loses me.

 

Why do the Twins care about anyone's value beyond their on-field performance right now? To be perfectly blunt, I don't give a rat's ass about Santana's trade value because the Twins made the postseason and Santana helped them get there.

 

Pick up another arm and let Santana help them get to the postseason again. One aspect of baseball fandom I don't really understand is the constant need to maximize trade value in every single player. Some guys give you their value on the field and help you win games and that's what matters.

 

If the Twins were coming off another 72 win season, sure. Trade Santana and get what you can out of him. But why on earth would you trade a guy that can help you win baseball games in the offseason following a postseason appearance when you have one of the youngest rosters in baseball? You go find players to help that guy, you don't just trade him away.*

 

*every player should be traded if the deal just blows you away and/or improves the MLB team

  • Carole Keller, USAFChief, gunnarthor and 8 others like this

#45 Broker

Broker

    Cedar Rapids

  • Members
  • 156 posts
  • LocationMinneapolis, Minn.

Posted 29 November 2017 - 03:50 PM

Trading our best pitcher seem kind of silly to me. We need more good pitchers not less.


#46 diehardtwinsfan

diehardtwinsfan

    Twins Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 11,819 posts
  • LocationThe charred ruins of BYTO

Posted 29 November 2017 - 03:58 PM

The only way I trade Santana is if he's picking up a prospect that the Rays covet and can be used with another prospect of ours that they covet to get Archer. Otherwise, I don't see the point in trading him. I'd argue that if he hits his 200 innings, then he likely had a good year and I'd be perfectly fine with him being around on a 1 year deal for less than a QO.

 

I really think this overthinks things...

  • Brock Beauchamp, SarasotaBill and Hollywood42 like this

#47 drjim

drjim

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 8,783 posts
  • LocationSt. Paul

Posted 29 November 2017 - 03:58 PM

 

I agree with the bolded but the rest kind of loses me.

 

Why do the Twins care about anyone's value beyond their on-field performance right now? To be perfectly blunt, I don't give a rat's ass about Santana's trade value because the Twins made the postseason and Santana helped them get there.

 

Pick up another arm and let Santana help them get to the postseason again. One aspect of baseball fandom I don't really understand is the constant need to maximize trade value in every single player. Some guys give you their value on the field and help you win games and that's what matters.

 

If the Twins were coming off another 72 win season, sure. Trade Santana and get what you can out of him. But why on earth would you trade a guy that can help you win baseball games in the offseason following a postseason appearance when you have one of the youngest rosters in baseball? You go find players to help that guy, you don't just trade him away.*

 

*every player should be traded if the deal just blows you away and/or improves the MLB team

 

This whole post is right but the bolded part nails it. The value for Santana right now is that he is going to help the 2018 Twins win ballgames. If you traded him, you'd have to replace him with someone similar (or more realistically, 2-3 someones similar).

  • diehardtwinsfan and Twins33 like this
Papers...business papers.

#48 Lee-The-Twins-Fan

Lee-The-Twins-Fan

    Ft Myers

  • Members
  • 316 posts

Posted 29 November 2017 - 04:05 PM

gunnarthor, on 28 Nov 2017 - 10:04 PM, said:

 

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?gunnarthor, on 28 Nov 2017 - 10:04 PM, said:

 

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?

 

 

 

The bottom line is, is Darvish THAT much better than Santana? Santana plus $11 million per year (the difference in their projected salaries at age 36)? 

 

Yes Darvish may be better. We should be going after top-of-the-line starting pitching talent. No question. But to add Darvish and trade Santana – when you need two pitchers at the front end of your rotation makes little sense.

 

We should pursue Ohtani too – I'd love to see him hit AND pitch in a Twins uniform. But he's never pitched in the minor leagues here, or in the majors. No one knows how he will do. He could be another Darvish, or a Kevin Tapani or a Mike Pelfrey. No one knows. So you can hope he'll be great, but you cannot count on him for the top of your rotation, like you can a Darvish or Santana.

 


#49 jimmer

jimmer

    A former AF SNCO who values integrity.

  • Members
  • 9,680 posts

Posted 29 November 2017 - 04:12 PM

 

I agree with the bolded but the rest kind of loses me.

 

Why do the Twins care about anyone's value beyond their on-field performance right now? To be perfectly blunt, I don't give a rat's ass about Santana's trade value because the Twins made the postseason and Santana helped them get there.

 

Pick up another arm and let Santana help them get to the postseason again. One aspect of baseball fandom I don't really understand is the constant need to maximize trade value in every single player. Some guys give you their value on the field and help you win games and that's what matters.

 

If the Twins were coming off another 72 win season, sure. Trade Santana and get what you can out of him. But why on earth would you trade a guy that can help you win baseball games in the offseason following a postseason appearance when you have one of the youngest rosters in baseball? You go find players to help that guy, you don't just trade him away.*

 

*every player should be traded if the deal just blows you away and/or improves the MLB team

The value I was referring to was in regards to trade value.If you don't think we should trade him, then that's fine.We just disagree on that.


#50 EddieMatthews

EddieMatthews

    Cedar Rapids

  • Members
  • 113 posts

Posted 29 November 2017 - 04:56 PM

Last year's hot stove was boiling over with expectations of a regression by Santana.  Same pot is on the stove this year.  Maybe he's learned a little in the past few years.  His 3-year span with the Twins is the best three year span in his career.  He has 40% of his WAR in the past 3 years.  He has the best defense behind him in his career (a little bias noted here).  

 

Let's see who steps up in 2018.  There are candidates, May, Berrios, Gibson, Mejia, Hughes (?), plus minor league starters who may light up spring training.  None of them would be as good as Santana.  

 

I would love for the Twins to sign a top starter.  Darvish is not the #1 ace they need.  Twins should keep their powder dry.  They should not be wasting it on less than top talent.

 

2018 will not be a World Series year.  2019 could be if their young stars continue to develop and a couple of starters (Berrios, May, ?) step up.  Then, adding the ace will pay big dividends.  With the supporting cast on the 2019 Twins, an ace in search of the WS ring will be happy to play in MN.

  • Hosken Bombo Disco likes this

#51 Deduno Abides

Deduno Abides

    Rochester Plates

  • Members
  • 1,781 posts

Posted 29 November 2017 - 05:15 PM

Everyone, including and especially the FO, wants a competitive team this year. That said, it would be good to trade Santana this year if three conditions occur:

1. Two superior pitchers are acquired first,
2. The FO has confidence in its revamped pitcher development program, and
3. You can get a return better than what Jaime Garcia brought.

I think #3 is the most certain, because Santana is probably a better pitcher than Garcia and his option year gives extra value. #1 will be easy to tell, but not until it happens, but #2 is something that will be known by the FO long before fans see evidence.

#52 GP830

GP830

    Ft Myers

  • Members
  • 456 posts
  • LocationMinneapolis

Posted 29 November 2017 - 07:30 PM

Everyone, including and especially the FO, wants a competitive team this year. That said, it would be good to trade Santana this year if three conditions occur:

1. Two superior pitchers are acquired first,
2. The FO has confidence in its revamped pitcher development program, and
3. You can get a return better than what Jaime Garcia brought.

I think #3 is the most certain, because Santana is probably a better pitcher than Garcia and his option year gives extra value. #1 will be easy to tell, but not until it happens, but #2 is something that will be known by the FO long before fans see evidence.


I️ think that about sums it up- though I️ would maybe even modify your first point to say 3 pitchers instead of 3.

#53 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,848 posts
  • LocationTaiwan

Posted 29 November 2017 - 07:30 PM

 

Last year's hot stove was boiling over with expectations of a regression by Santana.  Same pot is on the stove this year.  Maybe he's learned a little in the past few years.  His 3-year span with the Twins is the best three year span in his career.  He has 40% of his WAR in the past 3 years.  He has the best defense behind him in his career (a little bias noted here).  

 

Let's see who steps up in 2018.  There are candidates, May, Berrios, Gibson, Mejia, Hughes (?), plus minor league starters who may light up spring training.  None of them would be as good as Santana.  

 

I would love for the Twins to sign a top starter.  Darvish is not the #1 ace they need.  Twins should keep their powder dry.  They should not be wasting it on less than top talent.

 

2018 will not be a World Series year.  2019 could be if their young stars continue to develop and a couple of starters (Berrios, May, ?) step up.  Then, adding the ace will pay big dividends.  With the supporting cast on the 2019 Twins, an ace in search of the WS ring will be happy to play in MN.

Which FA starter are you targeting in 2019 that satisfies your criteria? Kershaw or bust?

That is the problem with your plan imo. There are no guarantees that any top starter makes it to FA next year.

  • Oldgoat_MN and Hosken Bombo Disco like 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


#54 Deduno Abides

Deduno Abides

    Rochester Plates

  • Members
  • 1,781 posts

Posted 29 November 2017 - 09:21 PM

This was a fun column. Here’s a proposal.

Ervin Santana ($13.5M + $14M option) plus Phil Hughes ($13.2M, $13.2M) plus Wander Javier to Atlanta for Kyle Wright and a lower prospect.

#55 Hollywood42

Hollywood42

    Elizabethton

  • Members
  • 14 posts

Posted 29 November 2017 - 10:40 PM

 

This was a fun column. Here’s a proposal.

Ervin Santana ($13.5M + $14M option) plus Phil Hughes ($13.2M, $13.2M) plus Wander Javier to Atlanta for Kyle Wright and a lower prospect.

 

No... Just no.... Getting rid of Hughes and his money would be nice, but that's about it


#56 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,848 posts
  • LocationTaiwan

Posted 29 November 2017 - 11:59 PM

 

No... Just no.... Getting rid of Hughes and his money would be nice, but that's about it

The Twins save 27M next season and they get the better prospect. And that prospect is a highly ranked pitching prospect. I am not sure what you object to but this would be a great deal and I don't know why the Braves would do it.

The Twins would have to turn around and bring in two very good pitchers though (27M extra to play with) and that could prove difficult but they would have one more very highly ranked prospect to deal and this could be the missing piece of a Chris Archer trade.

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


#57 gunnarthor

gunnarthor

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 8,766 posts

Posted 30 November 2017 - 08:46 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?

Huh. Outside of a comment I made about Yvonne Strahovski, this seems to be my most liked comment on TD. 

 

Nick, you're wrong!

  • Kelly Vance likes this

#58 Linus

Linus

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,940 posts

Posted 30 November 2017 - 09:52 AM

I think people are under valuing Erv. He's not an elite starter but then there are only a handful of those. He is reliable, durable and mostly effective. Considering a multi year window he's been the Twins best starter since Johan. He won't be as easily replaced as some posters think.

#59 drjim

drjim

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 8,783 posts
  • LocationSt. Paul

Posted 30 November 2017 - 10:13 AM

 

I think people are under valuing Erv. He's not an elite starter but then there are only a handful of those. He is reliable, durable and mostly effective. Considering a multi year window he's been the Twins best starter since Johan. He won't be as easily replaced as some posters think.

 

True this. Making 30+ starts at league average ERA is very valuable, even moreso for a team like the Twins who have such glaring holes in both the rotation and bullpen.

Papers...business papers.

#60 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Billy G.O.A.T

  • Twins Mods
  • 11,765 posts

Posted 30 November 2017 - 10:28 AM

Santana gave up 31 HR last year, and fortunately 20 of them were solo shots. Of the 11 HR he gave up with runners on, 7 of them occurred in the nine games between June 3 and July 21, the stretch where Santana was absolutely brutal and his early season glow had worn off.

 

He gave up tons of HR all through the season last year but got by early and late because his HR were almost exclusively solo. I'm in the minority, but yeah, I do think Santana falls apart next year. He somehow had his best H/9 and WHIP season at the age of 34 so he kept guys off the bases when he gave up the bombs, but his HR totals skyrocketed and his strikeout rate is failing to keep up with the increasing league trends. 

 

If he was a free agent with no ties to the Twins we'd all be looking at his peripheral numbers and nobody would want to trust him on a multi year deal.




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