Heyman: Twins asked about Santana

[kab21]

 

last year only 20 pitcher pitched every 5th game for the whole season. That Santana was a worthless bum and pitched in a mediocre number of games (30) should not be held against him since only 45 starting pitchers did better than his measly 30 games.

This isn't what I said at all. You are looking entirely at the past. I think there is a good chance that Santana has a fine season but 34 yr old pitchers can drop off quickly. In addition to that his contract is fine but it isn't cheap. Fangraphs project him at 2.3 WAR next season which is slightly better than his contract. I think getting a Gonsalves level pitcher would be a great get for the Twins. Adding a top 5-ish org prospect isn't a trivial return imo.

 

It is odd that the sentiment has changed on Santana. At the trade deadline there were many that would have taken literally anything for Santana and they blasted Terry Ryan for not moving him.

[Darius]

I'm not thinking Santana to Dodgers. Separate deals.

 

But there was talk about Dodgers potentially improving the prospect haul if the Twins took on a contract. Moving Santana could make that more doable.

I wasn't aware that Santana's contract had the Twins so close to the cap, that they'd have to get rid of him just to take on a middling salary in a trade.

 

Better be a damn good prospect. You're basically adding Santana (I get he's going to another team) into the trade, and getting a worse, equally expensive, player in return......for the Dodgers 23rd prospect rather than their 30th on the back end of the deal.

 

Also being the only respectable starting pitcher on the team.....you thought 103 losses was bad?

 

I don't like it. No value in doing something like that. You'd be dumping Santana, in the hopes of getting back Santana (aka a prospect that will end up as good as Santana) a few years down the road. All while still paying Santana's salary (aka the similar salary of the dump from the Dodgers).

[Darius]

It is odd that the sentiment has changed on Santana. At the trade deadline there were many that would have taken literally anything for Santana and they blasted Terry Ryan for not moving him.

A little dramatic, no?

 

What was the sentiment on Santana? Surely not negative, if people expected a trade for a decent return. Now some feel keeping going forward may be more beneficial than not....so to me, sounds like the sentiment in Santana is the same, but different in the trade. I don't find it overly unreasonable to take a different stance on a trade.

 

I do recall many wanting to see Santana traded, in the hopes of getting prospects. You said it pretty well yourself, "34 year old pitcher." If you can formulate that opinion from your couch, do you think a GM out there is going to give up anything significant enough to make that move?

 

People wanted him traded, sure. People also thoufhr the Twins could trade Plouffe for something, or still think someone will take Mauer. Let's not generalize and apply that to "many," (implying some kind of majority, or something).

 

I don't think anybody in their right mind would "take anything." What's the point of that? I also don't recall anyone "blasting" Ryan for not moving him (Antony?). I think many wanted him to try and move him. What the hell good does it do the franchise to give away your only pitcher for nothing, just for the sake of it? When your rebuilding, why shouldn't a player like Santana be discussed as an option?

 

Not really sure what you're driving towards here.

[ashbury]

I must be missing something here. When did he have big league success? To be honest look at his minor league numbers and tell me when he had success.

The major league resume isn't much, and injuries cloud his future. But his minor league numbers? Up through age 20 he was on a trajectory to be a very fine hitter, regardless of defensive position, and then to add that he's a shortstop made him an immense prospect. A .280 batting average can be empty, but Profar's was anything but that. Also, age matters when forecasting a prospect - to put up an .820 OPS in AA at age 19 after better numbers at single-A the year before (thus skipping high-A), and to follow that up with a partial season at AAA with similar performance before being called up - these were great numbers.

[Mr. Brooks]

I wasn't aware that Santana's contract had the Twins so close to the cap, that they'd have to get rid of him just to take on a middling salary in a trade.

 

Better be a damn good prospect. You're basically adding Santana (I get he's going to another team) into the trade, and getting a worse, equally expensive, player in return......for the Dodgers 23rd prospect rather than their 30th on the back end of the deal.

 

Also being the only respectable starting pitcher on the team.....you thought 103 losses was bad?

 

I don't like it. No value in doing something like that. You'd be dumping Santana, in the hopes of getting back Santana (aka a prospect that will end up as good as Santana) a few years down the road. All while still paying Santana's salary (aka the similar salary of the dump from the Dodgers).

Yeah. The idea is that you get a pitcher equal to Santana in a few years when it matters, as opposed to next year when it's meaningless.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

Twins to get: De Leon, Bellinger, Stewart, Ross Stripling, Dalton Pompey and Sean Reid Foley

Dodgers to get: Dozier, Danny Barnes, TJ Zeuch and Vlad Guerrero Jr.

Blue Jays to get: Santana, Eddie Rosario and Puig

 

I wasted a lot of time working on this don't tell me how terrible it is!

 

Seem to remember that either Falvey or Levin actually used internet proposals (or least read them and didn't dismiss them)... I like this (minus preferring Alvarez to Bellinger)...  send it up...

[darin617]

 

Even before his injury, I always thought Profar's status as top prospect was inflated due to all too common over-valuation of shortstops. His bat looked OK but it wasn't eye-popping, everyone needed to believe in a new special shortstop and he was what was available. His numbers never compared to the new crop of elite young shortstops that have come around since his star faded.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/p/profaju01.shtml

 

[diehardtwinsfan]

I feel like I'm beating a dead horse when I say this, but Santana was far from a "mid-rotation" arm last year. He was a borderline top 30 starter in all of baseball.  He pitched like a #2 this year.

 

His value has to do with risk.  Age, a UCL that was rehabbed, and PEDs.  I get wanting to move him for the right price. I will say this though, the Twins are absolutely absorbing more risk by holding him. The question is whether the reward in July will be higher than what it is now.

 

The Jays backed out in a trade that would have sent Foley this way if memory serves me right. I'm not sure he's going to net much more than Foley now, and I'm not sure he'd be a cinch to get Foley in July, even if he picks right up where he left off in 2016.

[darin617]

 

The major league resume isn't much, and injuries cloud his future. But his minor league numbers? Up through age 20 he was on a trajectory to be a very fine hitter, regardless of defensive position, and then to add that he's a shortstop made him an immense prospect. A .280 batting average can be empty, but Profar's was anything but that. Also, age matters when forecasting a prospect - to put up an .820 OPS in AA at age 19 after better numbers at single-A the year before (thus skipping high-A), and to follow that up with a partial season at AAA with similar performance before being called up - these were great numbers.

Just don't forget about the shoulder issues and that he plays a very difficult position of shortstop. If Texas can put Profar in any deal they better try it this winter before his stock falls when he is platooning 1st base.

[ashbury]

Just don't forget about the shoulder issues

I didn't. I said it right there in the post you responded to, that injuries cloud his future.

 

My post was in response to a statement questioning whether he had even had success in the minors. Just being in AA at age 19 reflects success, and he exceeded that standard by quite a lot. And that was all I was trying to get at.

[terrydactyls]

Seem to remember that either Falvey or Levin actually used internet proposals (or least read them and didn't dismiss them)...

Then here is an "outside the box" suggestion for the front office. Package every player in the organization (regardless of at what level they are currently playing) with the last name of Santana and see what you can get in return.

[jorgenswest]

I would take the best offer and move on. I don't believe his value will be better in July. There will be more arms as non-contenders emerge and some chance that he is injured or has declined.

 

This winter's starting pitching market is very thin. It is very likely that this is the high point in Santana's stay with the Twins. Sell.

[mudcat14]

 

I would take the best offer and move on. I don't believe his value will be better in July. There will be more arms as non-contenders emerge and some chance that he is injured or has declined.

This winter's starting pitching market is very thin. It is very likely that this is the high point in Santana's stay with the Twins. Sell.

 

Though I wouldn't mind if they made a move now, I expect his value would be greater at next July's deadline.  Erv has been remarkably consistent over the past decade, and I think the odds favor that will continue into 2017.  Right now, everyone who thinks that they need another pitcher has an internal fallback option or two that they hope can step up.  Come July and a few games back in the standings, some teams will know that those options aren't realistic.  It's amazing what the other guys desperation can do to increase your properties value.   

[jorgenswest]

I hope you are right. He had ERA's of just above 4 at the all star break in 2014 and 2016. While mediocre, that was much better than his value at the 2015 break following the PED suspension. Maybe this year he will get to the all star break stronger and there will be some building of interest.

 

Levine and Falvey have to balance that chance of a value increase against the possibility that he will again have an ERA above 4 as trade talks begin or worse and he misses a start or two in June or July.

 

The thought has peeked my interest. I may search for a group of similar pitchers at the same age and see how often they maintain their previous year's performance in the first half which I would assume would give them better value in July.

[Kwak]

Part of the responsibility of the Front Office is to put a Major League team on the field. It is one thing to trade a premier player (Dozier) because it is anticipated that several probable future  Major League players can be acquired--that is not the expectation for a trade of E. Santana. Keep him, simply because he is the only reliable starter on the team.

[h2oface]

Just what pitching starved Twins need - to sacrfice the only reliable starter they have for another redundant top prospect that can't perform when he gets to the show.

[drjim]

Part of the responsibility of the Front Office is to put a Major League team on the field. It is one thing to trade a premier player (Dozier) because it is anticipated that several probable future Major League players can be acquired--that is not the expectation for a trade of E. Santana. Keep him, simply because he is the only reliable starter on the team.

I agree with this. Santana is on a reasonable contract, has expectations of performance, is not necessarily at peak value, and the team as a big need for what he can provide, at least for the first half of the season.

 

If he was a free agent this contract would be a great signing for them.

 

A 75ish prospect arm is nice but really doesn't move the needle enough.

[Thrylos]

 

I feel like I'm beating a dead horse when I say this, but Santana was far from a "mid-rotation" arm last year. He was a borderline top 30 starter in all of baseball.  He pitched like a #2 this year.
 
His value has to do with risk.  Age, a UCL that was rehabbed, and PEDs.  I get wanting to move him for the right price. I will say this though, the Twins are absolutely absorbing more risk by holding him. The question is whether the reward in July will be higher than what it is now.

The Jays backed out in a trade that would have sent Foley this way if memory serves me right. I'm not sure he's going to net much more than Foley now, and I'm not sure he'd be a cinch to get Foley in July, even if he picks right up where he left off in 2016.

 

Agreed.  Here are his numbers in 2016:

 

Among starters with 130+ IP he is ranked:

fWAR t25-28th/106
ERA 28th

FIP 37th
WHIP 40th (BABIP .285)
SIERA 65th
K%-BB% 59th
K/9 72nd

 

So as far as WAR and ERA went, he was a top 30 pitcher, but his peripherals are forecasting a large regression coming, in addition to the other risk factors mentioned above.

 

[Dantes929]

 

well, if the Twins picked up De Leon, I'd have to think that someone would get moved from the rotation.  Potentially more so if Stewart were included. I'd personally dump Santiago first, though the return would be non-existent.  If I could get a couple B level prospects for ESan, I'd have to think about it.

I guess you would have to define B level prospects.    Twins are starting pitching starved and people want to give up the only guy in the rotation with an ERA below 5.   In fact, his ERA was over a run and a half better than anyone else's.     No way in the world I give him up for B level prospects.     I have not given up on the Twins competing next year.  Get DeLeon, put May back into the rotations, hope Berrios lives up to his promise and we will compete.   What is gained by getting rid of a guy with a 3.38 ERA unless you get something that you expect to be better than that in prospects.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

I guess you would have to define B level prospects.    Twins are starting pitching starved and people want to give up the only guy in the rotation with an ERA below 5.   In fact, his ERA was over a run and a half better than anyone else's.     No way in the world I give him up for B level prospects.     I have not given up on the Twins competing next year.  Get DeLeon, put May back into the rotations, hope Berrios lives up to his promise and we will compete.   What is gained by getting rid of a guy with a 3.38 ERA unless you get something that you expect to be better than that in prospects.

 

I pretty much only follow Sickles on the letter grades. I have no idea whom else assigns them, and not many do. What I'll say is this, Arcia and Kepler both topped out at B/B+ grade prospects at one point on that scale.  Anyone B- and above is a pretty good prospect, and in the top 150 on most lists, cause John is stingy. Dozier, I'm pretty sure, might have hit a B- at one point (but I could be wrong here), and a guy like Alvarez (whom we all covet), was on the border between a C+ and a B- last year.  Once John is done with his list, no doubt Alvarez will be a bit higher going into 2017, but I doubt he's an A level prospect (note that there is no A+ grade).  Bottom line, those are good prospects. So, if I'm getting a couple of B graded prospects for Santana, he's probably gone.

[jorgenswest]

I hope that the new front office isn't evaluating players based on their previous season stat line. He is a guy with a 3.38 ERA. He is also a guy with a 4.21 xFIP in 2016. One of those numbers isn't very useful for projection. Santana's xFIP lands him between Duffey and Milone among Twin starters.

 

They should sell high because of his age. They should sell high because his peripherals tell a different story than his ERA.

[The Wise One]

 

This isn't what I said at all. You are looking entirely at the past. I think there is a good chance that Santana has a fine season but 34 yr old pitchers can drop off quickly. In addition to that his contract is fine but it isn't cheap. Fangraphs project him at 2.3 WAR next season which is slightly better than his contract. I think getting a Gonsalves level pitcher would be a great get for the Twins. Adding a top 5-ish org prospect isn't a trivial return imo.

 

It is odd that the sentiment has changed on Santana. At the trade deadline there were many that would have taken literally anything for Santana and they blasted Terry Ryan for not moving him.

My sentiment towards Santana has not changed. He has been, is, and likely for his contract will be a solid starter. In regards with fangraphs projections, what has been their accuracy? About like the weatherman's?

[jorgenswest]

My sentiment towards Santana has not changed. He has been, is, and likely for his contract will be a solid starter. In regards with fangraphs projections, what has been their accuracy? About like the weatherman's?

Weather...

 

Are you concerned about projections or just those listed on fangraphs? Would you prefer that the Twins do not use or develop their own projections? If they do project, should they lean towards the peripherals or the actual ERA? Those you see on fangraphs will rely on the peripherals and age while looking back multiple years.

 

I hope the Twins use some model they trust in making projections.

[kab21]

 

My sentiment towards Santana has not changed. He has been, is, and likely for his contract will be a solid starter. In regards with fangraphs projections, what has been their accuracy? About like the weatherman's?

The projections almost match his average WAR for the last 4 years. I think that would be more accurate than using his 2nd best ERA of his career that is 0.70 points below his career average. 

And my original question asked was trying to figure out what people thought was a fair return. So far you have only said that a Gonsalves or Mejia level prospect isn't good enough. What do you think is a fair return for a 34 yr old 4.00 ERA pitcher?

 

He is a solid pitcher and that is why I have always said that the Twins shouldn't trade him just to trade him. I think getting a prospect back that will rank in the #3-5 range on the Twins list is a good move for a team that needs to rebuild.

[The Wise One]

 

The projections almost match his average WAR for the last 4 years. I think that would be more accurate than using his 2nd best ERA of his career that is 0.70 points below his career average. 

And my original question asked was trying to figure out what people thought was a fair return. So far you have only said that a Gonsalves or Mejia level prospect isn't good enough. What do you think is a fair return for a 34 yr old 4.00 ERA pitcher?

 

He is a solid pitcher and that is why I have always said that the Twins shouldn't trade him just to trade him. I think getting a prospect back that will rank in the #3-5 range on the Twins list is a good move for a team that needs to rebuild.

10/3.5 does not equal 2.3.

ERA last year was closer to 3 than 4. If you are going to chastise me for looking  at what happened in the past, you really ought to not do it yourself.

 

Gonsalves and Mejia are not anywhere near the same as prospects. A pitcher with 2 pitches still needing polishing. Mejia with the weight/suspension issues is not anywhere near Gonsalves for a prospect.  Mejia was received for a utility player having a career year. Santana should fetch more than that. Like Dozier, a team that would trade for Santana is a win in the next couple of years mode. 

 

[The Wise One]

 

Weather...

Are you concerned about projections or just those listed on fangraphs? Would you prefer that the Twins do not use or develop their own projections? If they do project, should they lean towards the peripherals or the actual ERA? Those you see on fangraphs will rely on the peripherals and age while looking back multiple years.

I hope the Twins use some model they trust in making projections.

I am sure that they have some method of projecting. The questions are what is the precision of tool and the need for said tools.  People age, there is no doubt about that. Some stat site has a curve based on average deterioration without showing what the range of possibilities are, just the average.  I have said it more than once but somehow the concept escapes people, but that curve is going to be different for different people.  How one measures a pitcher's work has many possibilities. Other than age, what measurable of Sanana's has changed over the last few years to say there is a decline.?  Speed of what he throws? Movement? What other measurement are consistent over time?  Answer those questions and you will have your answer to Santana's aging.

[diehardtwinsfan]

For all that talk of projections, has anyone actually published the failure rates of these projection systems?  I'm truly curious here, b/c whether it's fangraphs, steamer, whatever, everyone talks about these like their gospel truth and I've seen nothing published indicating how accurate they actually are.

[jorgenswest]

Multiple takes can usually be found after each season. Here are a few that show up early in a google search.

 

http://www.hardballtimes.com/evaluating-the-2014-projection-systems/

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/community/evaluating-2013-projections/

 

http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2016/1/21/10795210/marcel-pecota-steamer-zips-pitchers-projections-review

 

On SERA

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/want-to-be-more-consistent-just-be-better/

[kab21]

 

10/3.5 does not equal 2.3.

ERA last year was closer to 3 than 4. If you are going to chastise me for looking  at what happened in the past, you really ought to not do it yourself.

 

Gonsalves and Mejia are not anywhere near the same as prospects. A pitcher with 2 pitches still needing polishing. Mejia with the weight/suspension issues is not anywhere near Gonsalves for a prospect.  Mejia was received for a utility player having a career year. Santana should fetch more than that. Like Dozier, a team that would trade for Santana is a win in the next couple of years mode. 

You looked at a one year sample. I looked in the past at career averages and at multiple year samples (conveniently leaving out his worst season - 5 years ago). These are more reliable indicators than one season of one of the best ERA's of his entire career. That was the point of my response. But I am sure you could make all kinds of great decisions based on a one year sample size that looks like an outlier.

I have never ever compared Gonsalves and Mejia as prospects. I don't know where you think that I have. Every ranking has Gonsalves higher. I have given a range of prospects that I would consider acceptable in a Santana. You have clearly made it known that Mejia is not an acceptable return for Ervin but despite all of your nitpicking you still haven't answered my question. Is Gonsalves an acceptable return? If not Gonsalves what is an example of a prospect that would be acceptable? 

[kab21]

 

Multiple takes can usually be found after each season. Here are a few that show up early in a google search.

http://www.hardballtimes.com/evaluating-the-2014-projection-systems/

http://www.fangraphs.com/community/evaluating-2013-projections/

http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2016/1/21/10795210/marcel-pecota-steamer-zips-pitchers-projections-review

On SERA

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/want-to-be-more-consistent-just-be-better/

Are there any articles that focus on a single season of ERA as a reliable indicator for future performance? This nitpicking about projection systems is kind of silly when they have only been used for a ballpark indication of future performance. 

 

For Ervin his career ERA is 4.09 and 2014/2015 were almost exactly 4.00. Perhaps we could include 2013's 3.24 but then we should also include 2012's 5+ ERA. The point is that Ervin is very unlikely to have an ERA as low as he did last year. It doesn't matter what kind of analysis you do.