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....an-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).
Edited by JB_Iowa, 10 March 2014 - 10:06 AM.