Twins trade rumors

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I am not sure paying Ervin to leave is a good move, especially if we aren’t getting anything of value back.

Yup.  The ~$11 mil total it would cost to move Santana in that scenario would be better "used" to dump Nolasco instead.  We don't really need much more than 1 spot opened at the moment, and if we need a second, we could also cut Milone much more cheaply.

 

Or use a fraction of that money to help move Plouffe and Suzuki early and clear their spots for others in 2016.

 

 

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Hey, if they can trade Kevin Correia, they can trade ANYONE   

Correia was traded in August, for virtually nothing in return except modest salary relief (~$1 mil left at that point?).

 

Guys owed more than that can be better players but even harder to move, especially at this early date.

[MileHighTwinsFan]

Trade deadline is about clearing a path for the next generation, but also looking for ways to build the club for the future.  The Twins do have lots of trade chips in the minors and if they can make a deal for a quality MLB player with a few years of player control - why wouldn't they consider it?

 

For example, could they package Santana and a younger player in the minors to get something of higher quality in return?  As much as I love Polanco, he may be blocked by Dozier for years to come.  I would think pairing him with Santana could yield a valuable piece to the bullpen or even rotation.  

 

 

 

[dgwills]

I would be looking to contend in 2018 if I was the Twin's. What we'll need by then is top of the rotation pitcher. There should be a few available in free agency that year. So they need to move the players who will be eating up the payroll. Santana, Plouffe, Dozier, and Mauer (if he wants to be traded).  Picking up some prospects would be nice, but it's a secondary concern to me. 

[HitInAPinch]

 

Correia was traded in August, for virtually nothing in return except modest salary relief (~$1 mil left at that point?).

 

Guys owed more than that can be better players but even harder to move, especially at this early date.

It was a joke........

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

True, they all won't get huge deals. But they will probably get more than the 2yr-$26.4M that Santana has left. So I think it is reasonable that any team that can convince itself to answer 'yes' to the following questions would have a legitimate interest in trading for him:

 

1) Does Santana improve our current rotation?

2) Are we expecting to sign free agent pitching help next offseason?

3) If Santana was a free agent, would he get more than the 2yr-$26.4M that he is owed?

4) Is he better than anyone we could sign for that same 2yr-$26.4M?

5) Is he better than any internal options for the next year or two?

6) Are we hoping to contend during the contract?

 

Off the top of my head, I can see Baltimore, Toronto and Miami all being interested for the above reasons. And frankly, my mind has changed a lot on this. Initially, I would have said that no one is trading for Santana as he has basically zero value. But looking at the weak current market (and next year's free agent lists), I can understand the potential appeal. 

It feels like teams dramatically de-prioritize items #2-#6 on your list midseason, especially as it relates to a non-elite player like Santana making decent cash.  If they are thinking longer term, they're going to want Teheran, Odorizzi, Gray, etc.  Short term, those guys would help too, as could Hill or Hellickson.  Even with a weak market upcoming, most of those teams might rather look for a shorter term fix now, then take a one year flier this winter on a guy like Buchholz rather than lock in Santana at those terms.

 

There have been weak offseason SP markets before (evidence used to excuse a few Twins past offseason decisions too) -- how many guys like Santana have been moved in season with multiple years remaining?

 

Maybe someone might be willing to take his contract off ours hands for the above reasons, but they're not going to give up a decent prospect, so I'm not sure what the point of such a deal would be for the Twins.  Are we going to find a better use of $27 mil over the next two seasons?

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

It was a joke........

Okay.  I've seen similar sentiments expressed before, about some of the players Ryan has managed to trade.  Hard to tell if/when folks are serious...

[Vanimal46]

My guess is that if Mauer requested a trade it would be accommodated.

I would think that is the case. I don't know this as fact, but it seems like he values living closer to home more than chasing a WS ring. So odds are he won't be requesting a trade anytime soon.

[birddog]

If I were TR I would be on the phone after every Nolasco K or Plouffe and Dozier home runs. I agree that Santana is the one veteran SP who provides a spark of hope for the future--albeit as a #4 or 5. If Mauer cared more about a WS ring than family, he'd have been long gone by now so let's stop the wishful thinking.

 

Without SP there is no hope for immediate change and as mentioned our future is either at Fort Myers or was recently promoted to AA so 2018 is when the "calvary" arrives at the earliest. I would love to see the Pohlads sign an assistant GM from outside the organization now to oversee trade deadline moves. Not only would this give an outsider's perspective of the value our players have, but for the first time it would send TR a message that his renewable contract may not be renewed unless he can pull off the miracle trades it takes to raise the Titanic--formerly known as the Twins.

[drivlikejehu]

If someone isn't going to be a valuable contributor in 2019, his value to the Twins is zero, aside from the available trade return.

 

That's the earliest new management could have the team in a position to be at least somewhat competitive.

[gunnarthor]

 

I think Santana stays. He is, imo, a legit pitcher, and they'll want him on the staff next year.

That's sort of where I stand.  Unless someone gives them a really good offer - and they should listen - there really is no reason to move Santana just to get out of his contract.  He's more or less what they thought he'd be.  

 

Looking at similar deals over the last few years - Brandon McCarthy (FA at end of year) for 5th starter/reliever type.  Peavy (also FA) for a couple AAA arms.  John Lackey (cheap year left) for Joe Kelly and Craig Allen. Kazmir for two solid helium prospects.  

 

The Kazmir return is pretty good, actually but I think there was a pretty strong demand for pitching and few capable starters that year, which upped his price.  Hopefully that happens here.

[Craig Arko]

 

I would think that is the case. I don't know this as fact, but it seems like he values living closer to home more than chasing a WS ring. So odds are he won't be requesting a trade anytime soon.

Indeed; much the same reason that I'm not teaching English in S. Korea or Math in the UAE now.

[Vanimal46]

 

That's sort of where I stand.  Unless someone gives them a really good offer - and they should listen - there really is no reason to move Santana just to get out of his contract.  He's more or less what they thought he'd be.  

 

Looking at similar deals over the last few years - Brandon McCarthy (FA at end of year) for 5th starter/reliever type.  Peavy (also FA) for a couple AAA arms.  John Lackey (cheap year left) for Joe Kelly and Craig Allen. Kazmir for two solid helium prospects.  

 

The Kazmir return is pretty good, actually but I think there was a pretty strong demand for pitching and few capable starters that year, which upped his price.  Hopefully that happens here.

I agree with you and Mike on this one. Let me throw a hypothetical at you. If there are teams showing interest in Santana, and zero interest in Nolasco/Hughes, do you let Santana go, and fortunately or unfortunately, depending on how you think of it, retain Nolasco/Hughes for 2017?

[tobi0040]

I agree with you and Mike on this one. Let me throw a hypothetical at you. If there are teams showing interest in Santana, and zero interest in Nolasco/Hughes, do you let Santana go, and fortunately or unfortunately, depending on how you think of it, retain Nolasco/Hughes for 2017?

We can probably skip past the hypothetical portion of your question.

[gunnarthor]

 

I agree with you and Mike on this one. Let me throw a hypothetical at you. If there are teams showing interest in Santana, and zero interest in Nolasco/Hughes, do you let Santana go, and fortunately or unfortunately, depending on how you think of it, retain Nolasco/Hughes for 2017?

Yeah, if they get a Kazmir type deal for Santana, they should take it.  I still think Nolasco might have some value to a NL team for the same reason Santana does - not a horrible contract combined with a horrible FA year.  And his stuff would play better in the NL.  But if they can't move him and can move Santana, then they should do it anyway.  And the Twins would use Nolasco in the rotation next year.  

 

As for Hughes, I think he's close to done as a starter at this point.  They shouldn't rely/expect much from him going forward.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

That's sort of where I stand.  Unless someone gives them a really good offer - and they should listen - there really is no reason to move Santana just to get out of his contract.  He's more or less what they thought he'd be.  

 

Looking at similar deals over the last few years - Brandon McCarthy (FA at end of year) for 5th starter/reliever type.  Peavy (also FA) for a couple AAA arms.  John Lackey (cheap year left) for Joe Kelly and Craig Allen. Kazmir for two solid helium prospects.  

 

The Kazmir return is pretty good, actually but I think there was a pretty strong demand for pitching and few capable starters that year, which upped his price.  Hopefully that happens here.

How are they similar deals?  Remaining obligation:

 

Kazmir: 2 months, ~$4 mil

Lackey: 1.3 seasons, ~$5 mil (Boston also sent cash with him to offset some of that)

Peavy: 2 months, ~$5 mil (again Boston also sent cash with him to offset some of that)

McCarthy: 2 months, ~$5 mil (Arizona also sent cash with him to offset some of that)

 

Ervin Santana: 2.5 seasons, ~$35 mil, plus a vesting option

 

There is definitely a trend to the deals you brought up, but Santana doesn't fit that trend.  He also lags Kazmir (166 ERA+) and Lackey (111 ERA+) in terms of performance at the time of their deals.

[Winston Smith]

Maybe someone might be willing to take his contract off ours hands for the above reasons, but they're not going to give up a decent prospect, so I'm not sure what the point of such a deal would be for the Twins.  Are we going to find a better use of $27 mil over the next two seasons?

I'm sure the Pohlads could find something non-baseball related to spend the money on.

[gunnarthor]

 

How are they similar deals?  Remaining obligation:

 

Kazmir: 2 months, ~$4 mil

Lackey: 1.3 seasons, ~$5 mil (Boston also sent cash with him to offset some of that)

Peavy: 2 months, ~$5 mil (again Boston also sent cash with him to offset some of that)

McCarthy: 2 months, ~$5 mil (Arizona also sent cash with him to offset some of that)

 

Ervin Santana: 2.5 seasons, ~$35 mil, plus a vesting option

 

There is definitely a trend to the deals you brought up, but Santana doesn't fit that trend.  He also lags Kazmir (166 ERA+) and Lackey (111 ERA+) in terms of performance at the time of their deals.

Shouldn't have said deals, should have said types.  All of these guys were more or less league avg pitchers at the time, with varying strengths (innings v. rate stats) and weaknesses (health, rate stats).  All were seen as middle or back end starters.  Lackey was probably the best and McCarthy the worst.  

 

Part of Santana's appeal - per the OP - was that he was under contract for next year, which isn't always what deadline deals look for.  Depending on the team, that can be seen as a bonus or a negative.  But the implication by Cafardo is that it is a good thing.  

[DaveW]

Trading Mauer would be one of the dumbest things this team could possibly do:

 

First off: they wouldn't get anything notable in return for Mauer and would still have to pick up a huge chunk of that contract.

Second off: Mauer is like one of 3 guys on this team that actually is taking good at bats, good example for the youngsters to emulate.

[laloesch]

The Twins are a rebuilding team, I don't see the logic of keeping Santana around when he is slightly better than mediocre and isn't part of the long term plans.  If he fetches a legitimate prospect and the Twins can escape the final two years of his deal by eating 20-25% of his remaining salary, I don't know how you turn it down.  I'd take it and run.  Next up Nolasco and then Hughes.

 

 

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Shouldn't have said deals, should have said types.  All of these guys were more or less league avg pitchers at the time, with varying strengths (innings v. rate stats) and weaknesses (health, rate stats).  All were seen as middle or back end starters.  Lackey was probably the best and McCarthy the worst.  

 

Part of Santana's appeal - per the OP - was that he was under contract for next year, which isn't always what deadline deals look for.  Depending on the team, that can be seen as a bonus or a negative.  But the implication by Cafardo is that it is a good thing.  

History doesn't seem to support Cafardo.  I'm having a hard time coming up with a comparable type/liability as Santana ever being moved midseason.  It's not like there hasn't been weak SP markets before.  James Shields might be the closest comp, and that was an unusual move -- the exception that proves the rule, so to speak.

 

Of course, Cafardo also suggested someone could try to acquire Joe Mauer at the deadline, which tells me his suggestions might not exactly be based in reality.

[Mike Sixel]

I understand the desire to trade EVERYONE.....I just don't think it happens. I am also not 100% sure it should happen. I am highly conflicted on a few cases for older players:

 

Dozier.....he won't be good in 3-6 years, when this team should be peaking, but he's also likely to be good for a couple years. I am not sure on Polanco, nor do I see another option he's really blocking. If you are sold on Polanco, you deal him. If not, I think you keep him unless you get a good lottery ticket back.

 

Santana.....you need 5 starters. I don't think he brings much back. I also think having one veteran the other starters can talk to and learn from does matter. I don't think Hughes can do that from the DL or bullpen, and given how Nolasco talks, I'm not sure I want that to be him. I'd probably keep him around, despite my feeling he's not part of the next great Twins' team.

 

Suzuki.....every team needs a veteran catcher. I don't mind Suzuki as a backup, I mind him as the primary option that is never PH for, and who wears out from too much playing time. If used properly, I think he adds value in the same way Santana does. That said....you could deal him and sign him or another veteran in the off season. I'd probably deal him, but if they kept him and used him correctly. I'd not be upset.

 

Other than that, I'd probably deal everyone over 27 or whatever age you want to pick. 

[Everyday Eddy]

 

Mauer should want to pack up his wife and 2 young children and move away from his and his wife's entire families?  Ok, sure

 

If he's fine wasting away in a losing market that's his issue.    He's extremely wealthy.    Don't act like it would be an enormous burden for him to play somewhere else for a few years

[gunnarthor]

 

History doesn't seem to support Cafardo.  I'm having a hard time coming up with a comparable type/liability as Santana ever being moved midseason.  It's not like there hasn't been weak SP markets before.  James Shields might be the closest comp, and that was an unusual move -- the exception that proves the rule, so to speak.

 

Of course, Cafardo also suggested someone could try to acquire Joe Mauer at the deadline, which tells me his suggestions might not exactly be based in reality.

Yeah, Cafardo is not the best source and Santana type trades are rare.  The reason I created the thread in the first place was that I was surprised their were rumors about Santana and the quote from the unnamed assistant GM.  I'd still bet against the Twins trading him and I don't think we should trade him to just get out from his contract, but it'll be fun if we just had another chip for the trade deadline b/c not a lot of good has happened this season.  

[alarp33]

 

If he's fine wasting away in a losing market that's his issue.    He's extremely wealthy.    Don't act like it would be an enormous burden for him to play somewhere else for a few years

 

Huh? Who cares if he's wealthy. That's beside the point. The post I replied to said he should "want to leave".  

 

No one said it would be an enormous  burden to play elsewhere. There's plenty of reasons he signed to play in MN, and got a no trade clause

[Everyday Eddy]

 

Huh? Who cares if he's wealthy. That's beside the point. The post I replied to said he should "want to leave".  

 

No one said it would be an enormous  burden to play elsewhere. There's plenty of reasons he signed to play in MN, and got a no trade clause

 

You're implying that he's got his family around him so why would he want to leave.    I'm implying that he's wealthy enough to leave and easily still have family around.    It's noble to stay and want to win in your hometown, but it's not going to happen here for him.    I don't think it's that crazy to say he should want to play for a winner

[REPETE]

 

I understand the desire to trade EVERYONE.....I just don't think it happens. I am also not 100% sure it should happen. I am highly conflicted on a few cases for older players:

 

Dozier.....he won't be good in 3-6 years, when this team should be peaking, but he's also likely to be good for a couple years. I am not sure on Polanco, nor do I see another option he's really blocking. If you are sold on Polanco, you deal him. If not, I think you keep him unless you get a good lottery ticket back.

 

Santana.....you need 5 starters. I don't think he brings much back. I also think having one veteran the other starters can talk to and learn from does matter. I don't think Hughes can do that from the DL or bullpen, and given how Nolasco talks, I'm not sure I want that to be him. I'd probably keep him around, despite my feeling he's not part of the next great Twins' team.

 

Suzuki.....every team needs a veteran catcher. I don't mind Suzuki as a backup, I mind him as the primary option that is never PH for, and who wears out from too much playing time. If used properly, I think he adds value in the same way Santana does. That said....you could deal him and sign him or another veteran in the off season. I'd probably deal him, but if they kept him and used him correctly. I'd not be upset.

 

Other than that, I'd probably deal everyone over 27 or whatever age you want to pick. 

I agree 100% with this.  The one name not mentioned is Plouffe, but he should be first on the block, no matter what they could or could not get for him.  He is definitely blocking the future.

 

Looking to the future is good, but you need someone around to teach the kids coming up how to play at this level, and how to not be satisfied just being here.  I think Dozier fits this bill. 
 

Giving up Santana for nothing makes no sense.  If they get a high potential return, then go ahead, but I don't see that happening.  Therefore, keep him on the roster, because it will cost even more to replace his mediocrity.  He's not blocking any youth movement, and is a good clubhouse guy.

 

[alarp33]

 

You're implying that he's got his family around him so why would he want to leave.    I'm implying that he's wealthy enough to leave and easily still have family around.    It's noble to stay and want to win in your hometown, but it's not going to happen here for him.    I don't think it's that crazy to say he should want to play for a winner

 

You should really try to get some perspective.  Sorry you think Mauer makes too much money (that's why you're telling him how he should want to live his life, run his career, right?), but its not coming out of your checkbook.  He will be a Twin through 2018, and you'll just have to accept he's not going to hit a bunch of dingers.  

[wsnydes]

 

I'm sure the Pohlads could find something non-baseball related to spend the money on.

They could put another bar in Target Field.  Or hire a consultant to expand the concessions options further while adding to the already steep cost.

[Everyday Eddy]

 

You should really try to get some perspective.  Sorry you think Mauer makes too much money, but its not coming out of your checkbook.  He will be a Twin through 2018, and you'll just have to accept he's not going to hit a bunch of dingers.  

 

Ever heard of putting words in someone's mouth?  My gosh