Rumor: Yankees and Twins had conversations about Santana

[old nurse]

 

Okay, a 34 yr old with poor peripherals is going to get a haul.

 

Oh, wait you didn't say a haul of prospects. I didn't say bottom prospects either. Ervin's value is a decent prospect or two but nothing that significantly changes anything.

 

Why continue to use this terrible comparison?

The Yankees traded top tier players that were actually going to be FA's for actual top prospects (multiple top 25 and top 50 prospects). The Twins don't have those possibilities. Their trade candidates are signed for next year and they are fetching borderline top 100 prospects that may not be up in 2018. If Twins had players like the Yankees did last year then I would fully support a trade. If Ervin was getting some of these fantasy packages that some on this site think he will get while at the same time expecting him to be awful next year then I am on board.

Way back when in the days of old when this thread started, what was said that the Yankees were offering? I will give you a reminder, bottom prospects. Nary a decent one mentioned.  Not even something  you could trade to get Huscar back. The term decent prospect is going to mean different things to different people.

[old nurse]

 

Yup. Exactly, which is why there is a big 'Rumor' heading up the title of the thread, which is what it is unless sources and content is verified. That said, there's no reason we can't speculate, throw out hypotheticals, dream or be practical in trade talk. That's really all this thread is. It gives us something to ponder when asked 'Is this enough for so and so?' 'Do you pull the trigger on that?' 'Is this really what we need?' 'What would it really take?' These are all just opinions and ideas.

Sorry Chi, miss read your post. Funny thing on the whole thread is that  substitute Garcia for Santana and the Twins started with Tate and ended where they did the OP would have credibility

[laloesch]

 

Hard pass. We shouldn't trade Santana now unless we are getting back at least one controllable starter who is ready for his big league tryout and has a good chance of being in next year's rotation.  That's next year, not 2019 or 2020. We need to get Santana's replacement out of the trade. I could see taking risk and enduring the ups and downs of a young starter in return for trading a solid veteran starter, but nothing less, and it needs to be a starter we can confidently project as at least a #3 type guy. The suggestion by the Yankees is not even close to that. 

 

 

I don't understand this thought process.  You are setting up a near impossible scenario that no-one will meet.  We have the youngest lineup in the majors right now and a starter that is two years (if they pick up his option) away from free agency that will be 34 by seasons end.  The timelines just don't match and no-one is going to give up a #3 guy that close to the majors in exchange for Santana at this point.  It's just not gonna happen.  When this young core hits it's prime Santana will be LONG GONE...contemplating retirement. 

 

Trade Santana NOW for two AA starters and bam we've added more depth to a farm system and talent that could easily hit the majors the next two seasons and contribute long into the future. Sure those guys may not work out, but at least you maximized the return for a guy likely to be gone in two years anyways.  Unless you plan on extending him.

 

[Mike Sixel]

 

Okay, a 34 yr old with poor peripherals is going to get a haul.

 

Oh, wait you didn't say a haul of prospects. I didn't say bottom prospects either. Ervin's value is a decent prospect or two but nothing that significantly changes anything.

 

Why continue to use this terrible comparison?

The Yankees traded top tier players that were actually going to be FA's for actual top prospects (multiple top 25 and top 50 prospects). The Twins don't have those possibilities. Their trade candidates are signed for next year and they are fetching borderline top 100 prospects that may not be up in 2018. If Twins had players like the Yankees did last year then I would fully support a trade. If Ervin was getting some of these fantasy packages that some on this site think he will get while at the same time expecting him to be awful next year then I am on board.

 

You said trading players while the team was good would hurt the team's performance the following year. I merely provided one counter example to that. I was not discussing or replying to comments about what they got in trades, or what the Twins could  get in trades. No idea what your response is to, since that was not the discussion.

[laloesch]

 

I think you may be misunderstanding the point.  There is a significant psychological component that would go with trading Santana that would not apply with respect to trading Garcia or, for that matter, Kintzler. The consideration that I think becomes paramount really involves the message to the team. Trading Santana sends a message  that not only do we not expect to contend this year, we don't expect to contend next year and perhaps not in 2019 either so we are trading our most reliable veteran starter and hoping to rebuild our pitching staff  from scratch. Trading Santana for two mid-level AA starters, your proposed scenario and frankly probably what he would bring at this stage, tells the team that next year's rotation is going to consist of Berrios, Mejia, and a rotating cast  of hopefuls//retreads  or perhaps a prayer to the gods for significant bad weather until Berrios and Mejia can pitch again. Trading Santana also makes it difficult to attract a FA pitcher because the team will be at least another year away from contention.

 

In short, I think trading Santana sends the message that  2018 will also be a development year and the earliest team should hope to compete is 2019 and then only if young minor-league pitching  improves quickly or the team breaks the bank for a FA starter.  I think when you balance that message against what I think we all would agree is likely to be a somewhat meager return in a trade, trading Santana doesn't make sense. If, on the other hand, we can get a young major league ready starting pitcher  from a team that expects to contend this year and the next two or three years and thus doesn't want to deal with the ups and downs of that young pitcher, we should make the deal.

 

in my view, sometimes the internal message is more important than external performance two years from now. I agree that by 2020 at the latest Santana as an effective starter will be a distant memory and we might be happy to have whatever mediocre return is now available  (although if the return really is mediocre,  it seems unlikely they would be much help even by 2020). There is a lot of pitching development that needs to be done and it helps young pitchers to have a veteran starter to emulate. I think it is more important to send the right message to the team and have that veteran mentor on the starting staff  then to pick up a couple AA starters who might or might not someday contribute. My attitude changes if we can get a starter that you could project making a real contribution next year but I don't think that is likely. Hence, I think Santana is likely to stay and I think that's the right answer..

 

I get where you are going with this.  I disagree though.  I don't think it's that grave of a situation if the Twins trade Santana for a couple of AA prospects.  Almost the entire lineup is mid 20's.  Santana and Kintzler stick out like sore thumbs at 34 & 36.  Breslow too before he was released.  

 

There ALL very young and still learning.  And while i value veteran leadership, etc. Santana is NOT here long term.  After 2019 (assuming they pick up his option), he's gone anyways and the core lineup still hasn't reached it's prime years.  Deal him when he's at max value.  

[drjim]

 

I think you may be misunderstanding the point.  There is a significant psychological component that would go with trading Santana that would not apply with respect to trading Garcia or, for that matter, Kintzler. The consideration that I think becomes paramount really involves the message to the team. Trading Santana sends a message  that not only do we not expect to contend this year, we don't expect to contend next year and perhaps not in 2019 either so we are trading our most reliable veteran starter and hoping to rebuild our pitching staff  from scratch. Trading Santana for two mid-level AA starters, your proposed scenario and frankly probably what he would bring at this stage, tells the team that next year's rotation is going to consist of Berrios, Mejia, and a rotating cast  of hopefuls//retreads  or perhaps a prayer to the gods for significant bad weather until Berrios and Mejia can pitch again. Trading Santana also makes it difficult to attract a FA pitcher because the team will be at least another year away from contention.

 

In short, I think trading Santana sends the message that  2018 will also be a development year and the earliest team should hope to compete is 2019 and then only if young minor-league pitching  improves quickly or the team breaks the bank for a FA starter.  I think when you balance that message against what I think we all would agree is likely to be a somewhat meager return in a trade, trading Santana doesn't make sense. If, on the other hand, we can get a young major league ready starting pitcher  from a team that expects to contend this year and the next two or three years and thus doesn't want to deal with the ups and downs of that young pitcher, we should make the deal.

 

in my view, sometimes the internal message is more important than external performance two years from now. I agree that by 2020 at the latest Santana as an effective starter will be a distant memory and we might be happy to have whatever mediocre return is now available  (although if the return really is mediocre,  it seems unlikely they would be much help even by 2020). There is a lot of pitching development that needs to be done and it helps young pitchers to have a veteran starter to emulate. I think it is more important to send the right message to the team and have that veteran mentor on the starting staff  then to pick up a couple AA starters who might or might not someday contribute. My attitude changes if we can get a starter that you could project making a real contribution next year but I don't think that is likely. Hence, I think Santana is likely to stay and I think that's the right answer..

 

All of this would be mitigated if they aggressively add starting pitching in the offseason. Of course, that is easier said than executed.

[NDTimIrish]

If a team isn't willing to offer one top 50 prospect or two top 100 prospects for Santana, hard pass.

You do realize that Santana is 34 and has an FIP of nearly 5 correct? Couple that with a $14 million salary. If we can get one top 100 prospect for him it would be a bigger upset than Douglas over Tyson. 

 

[Mike Sixel]

 

No offense but this is an insane comment. You do realize that Santana is 34 and has an FIP of nearly 5 correct? Couple that with a $14 million salary. If we can get one top 100 prospect for him it would be a bigger upset than Douglas over Tyson. 

 

great line! I don't agree completely, but great line!

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

No offense but this is an insane comment. You do realize that Santana is 34 and has an FIP of nearly 5 correct? Couple that with a $14 million salary. If we can get one top 100 prospect for him it would be a bigger upset than Douglas over Tyson. 

I realize that's an overpay. I'm in no rush to trade Santana so my asking price would be steep.

[old nurse]

 

No offense but this is an insane comment. You do realize that Santana is 34 and has an FIP of nearly 5 correct? Couple that with a $14 million salary. If we can get one top 100 prospect for him it would be a bigger upset than Douglas over Tyson. 

No offense but you do realize the inexact nature of fip as a predictor? RE24 for the season would lead one to believe that Santana is still doing above average.   His DRA by baseball Prospectus still comes in under 4   It is all about whatever metric you want to use to prove your point.  The market on starting pitching is all dependent on whatever a GM believes the player will bring to their team

[old nurse]

It is still very possible that Santana would pass through waivers.

[drjim]

 

I agree there. I just don't think the Twins will be able to aggressively add starting pitching this winter. I don't think they will be willing to pay for it and I don't think the high end will come to Minnesota if they do. 

 

I agree, which is why I'm glad they held on to Santana.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I agree there. I just don't think the Twins will be able to aggressively add starting pitching this winter. I don't think they will be willing to pay for it and I don't think the high end will come to Minnesota if they do. 

I'm skeptical as well but free agency isn't the only way to make that happen. The Twins have some interesting pieces on the farm and few of them are the love children of Falvey/Levine. It will be interesting to see how they mould the organization into their vision. I hope we're surprised this offseason and they trade some of the farm for immediate pitching help.

[Bill Brown69]

 

I think you may be misunderstanding the point.  There is a significant psychological component that would go with trading Santana that would not apply with respect to trading Garcia or, for that matter, Kintzler. The consideration that I think becomes paramount really involves the message to the team. Trading Santana sends a message  that not only do we not expect to contend this year, we don't expect to contend next year and perhaps not in 2019 either so we are trading our most reliable veteran starter and hoping to rebuild our pitching staff  from scratch. Trading Santana for two mid-level AA starters, your proposed scenario and frankly probably what he would bring at this stage, tells the team that next year's rotation is going to consist of Berrios, Mejia, and a rotating cast  of hopefuls//retreads  or perhaps a prayer to the gods for significant bad weather until Berrios and Mejia can pitch again. Trading Santana also makes it difficult to attract a FA pitcher because the team will be at least another year away from contention.

 

In short, I think trading Santana sends the message that  2018 will also be a development year and the earliest team should hope to compete is 2019 and then only if young minor-league pitching  improves quickly or the team breaks the bank for a FA starter.  I think when you balance that message against what I think we all would agree is likely to be a somewhat meager return in a trade, trading Santana doesn't make sense. If, on the other hand, we can get a young major league ready starting pitcher  from a team that expects to contend this year and the next two or three years and thus doesn't want to deal with the ups and downs of that young pitcher, we should make the deal.

 

in my view, sometimes the internal message is more important than external performance two years from now. I agree that by 2020 at the latest Santana as an effective starter will be a distant memory and we might be happy to have whatever mediocre return is now available  (although if the return really is mediocre,  it seems unlikely they would be much help even by 2020). There is a lot of pitching development that needs to be done and it helps young pitchers to have a veteran starter to emulate. I think it is more important to send the right message to the team and have that veteran mentor on the starting staff  then to pick up a couple AA starters who might or might not someday contribute. My attitude changes if we can get a starter that you could project making a real contribution next year but I don't think that is likely. Hence, I think Santana is likely to stay and I think that's the right answer..

 

I stated in a different thread that trading Santana now would mean that not 1 position player would listen to any long term offers this winter. IMHO this winter is the time to identify which one is,,,,

 

Part of the long term plan

Will continue to improve

Will be a "ticket seller"

Will accept a reasonable/fair offer that keeps them here for at least 2 years of free agency but prefer 4.

 

Falvey/Levine make a very good wage. Their job is to identify 1 if not 2-3 of our young core that are going to be top notch players for a long time and sign them. I for one am sick of the revolving door and excuses about risk/money etc. Sign the right guys dammit and keep them here long enough to discuss their HOF credentials!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Richie the Rally Goat]

It is still very possible that Santana would pass through waivers.

or get claimed and a trade gets worked out

[kab21]

 

I get where you are going with this.  I disagree though.  I don't think it's that grave of a situation if the Twins trade Santana for a couple of AA prospects.  Almost the entire lineup is mid 20's.  Santana and Kintzler stick out like sore thumbs at 34 & 36.  Breslow too before he was released.  

 

There ALL very young and still learning.  And while i value veteran leadership, etc. Santana is NOT here long term.  After 2019 (assuming they pick up his option), he's gone anyways and the core lineup still hasn't reached it's prime years.  Deal him when he's at max value.  

No, it is a grave situation for 2018. A lot of people suggest that they could add a FA starter with the money that Santana is currently. The problem with that is that Twins need add 2 competent starters if they keep Santana. That is already difficult. If they trade him then they need to add 3 competent starters. That sounds impossible.

And this max value bit is nonsense. He is likely fetching a borderline top 100 prospect at best. That is nice but not a game changer for the farm system. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

No, it is a grave situation for 2018. A lot of people suggest that they could add a FA starter with the money that Santana is currently. The problem with that is that Twins need add 2 competent starters if they keep Santana. That is already difficult. If they trade him then they need to add 3 competent starters. That sounds impossible.

And this max value bit is nonsense. He is likely fetching a borderline top 100 prospect at best. That is nice but not a game changer for the farm system. 

Yes, pretty much all of this.

 

Though I don't believe the Twins need two starters along with Santana. I think one will do. Leave the final spot open for May (likely), Gonsalves (less likely but possible), or Romero (the outsider based building up his arm and IP).

 

At that point, you open the season with two established vets, one very good young arm, one less promising but deserves another shot after a solid rookie season arm, and then a wildcard at the back of the rotation. You also have two ready or near-ready arms behind him. There's also Littel, who may play into Opening Day plans.

 

Is that a great rotation? No, likely not... but it's probably a decent one with enough insurance behind it to not fall apart.

 

But to enact that strategy, Gonsalves and/or Littel need to spend quality time in Minnesota this season. Get an idea what you have and take as much information into the offseason as possible.

 

And that means both Colon and Gibson should be shown the door as soon as possible. If you're going to punt on the season, then punt on the damned season and look to the future.

[kab21]

 

Yes, pretty much all of this.

 

Though I don't believe the Twins need two starters along with Santana. I think one will do. Leave the final spot open for May (likely), Gonsalves (less likely but possible), or Romero (the outsider based building up his arm and IP).

 

At that point, you open the season with two established vets, one very good young arm, one less promising but deserves another shot after a solid rookie season arm, and then a wildcard at the back of the rotation. You also have two ready or near-ready arms behind him. There's also Littel, who may play into Opening Day plans.

 

Is that a great rotation? No, likely not... but it's probably a decent one with enough insurance behind it to not fall apart.

 

But to enact that strategy, Gonsalves and/or Littel need to spend quality time in Minnesota this season. Get an idea what you have and take as much information into the offseason as possible.

 

And that means both Colon and Gibson should be shown the door as soon as possible. If you're going to punt on the season, then punt on the damned season and look to the future.

I didn't say two established vets. They need two more competent starters. There is a chance that they can get lucky with a prospect stepping up (more than Mejia but not as much as Berrios obviously) but it is very unlikely that they can find two prospects to be good (and not have Mejia step back). Having 3 question marks (and Mejia) is leading to a lot of disappointment next season.

[Dantes929]

 

Yes, pretty much all of this.

 

Though I don't believe the Twins need two starters along with Santana. I think one will do. Leave the final spot open for May (likely), Gonsalves (less likely but possible), or Romero (the outsider based building up his arm and IP).

 

At that point, you open the season with two established vets, one very good young arm, one less promising but deserves another shot after a solid rookie season arm, and then a wildcard at the back of the rotation. You also have two ready or near-ready arms behind him. There's also Littel, who may play into Opening Day plans.

 

Is that a great rotation? No, likely not... but it's probably a decent one with enough insurance behind it to not fall apart.

 

But to enact that strategy, Gonsalves and/or Littel need to spend quality time in Minnesota this season. Get an idea what you have and take as much information into the offseason as possible.

 

And that means both Colon and Gibson should be shown the door as soon as possible. If you're going to punt on the season, then punt on the damned season and look to the future.

I still have great hope for May and wonder what this season would have been had he been healthy and good.    Bringing Gonsalves and/or Littel and/or Romero up and keeping hope for the season   are not mutually exclusive and may instead be cause and effect.   I might be dreaming but it is a nice dream.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I didn't say two established vets. They need two more competent starters. There is a chance that they can get lucky with a prospect stepping up (more than Mejia but not as much as Berrios obviously) but it is very unlikely that they can find two prospects to be good (and not have Mejia step back). Having 3 question marks (and Mejia) is leading to a lot of disappointment next season.

That's fair. Maybe Gonsalves can come up and surprise us for ten starts, which would change the landscape quite a bit.

[gocgo]

The Twins play Cleveland 6 more times at home and the Royals 7 more times.  I don't like throwing in the towel.  It's gotta affect the attitude of the guys that are left.  I don't care how professional you are.  Couple with that, you just went from getting Garcia and giving the squad a vote of confidence to changing the vote. You have a limited number of chances to go for it and you never know if injuries happen to our team or to a competitor.  My incentive to watch the rest of the season just took a dive.

[kab21]

 

That's fair. Maybe Gonsalves can come up and surprise us for ten starts, which would change the landscape quite a bit.

If it was just Gonsalves then I would be concerned. Perhaps it is Romero or Jorge or Littell or May (eventually back) or even a guy like Enns. There will be a fair amount of depth (not typical AAAA guys) in the upper minors next year. This is a major difference from this year and every previous year imo. But they definitely need to add 1 good SP or 2 SP if they trade Ervin. It isn't a great rotation and will require a few good bounces but it can work.

 

I also say this being hesitantly optimistic that Mejia will progress in year two. There are plenty of warnings about relying on him too much. 5 IP/GS - 4.97 xFIP - 4+ BB/9. He will definitely be part of the rotation but part of the plan B/C options might be needed if he doesn't progress next year. 

[TNTwinsFan]

All this wailing and gnashing of teeth over losing ONE guy...a "closer" that K'd around 5 guys/9...the Twins were/are 2 good SP's and about 3 good RP's away from playoff contention. Get a grip. They will finish within 5 games of .500 (above or below) amd the young guys on the team will be that much better off having spent some time playong decent ball while honing their skills. 2018 will be the year they get that much closer to contention with 2019 being the year they are truly a contender. Hence the trades they made these past couple of weeks.

[DaveW]

The odds that Santana passes through waivers to someone that would work out a trade with the Twins is next to zero.

1st off:  There are very few teams that would be "upset" to get "stuck" with Santana on his current contract.

2nd off: with the way the playoffs are set up now: literally every team other than a few are still effectively "in it" in the playoff hunt. Plenty of teams would put in a claim just to block other teams from claiming him, and then offer next to nothing. They know if that's the case the Twins will gladly pull him back (since they can easily trade him in the off season) worst case scenario (which never would happen) is they have a solid #3 type for the next 1.3 years on a pretty solid deal.

[DaveW]

Also talked to my source:

More or less:

Yankees knew they had a lot of options for solid pitching.

Twins thought they were getting slightly lowballed for Santana.

Teams agreed to a "on paper" fair deal for Garcia.

Yankees went out and got Gray, high risk, high reward.

[laloesch]

 

I'm skeptical as well but free agency isn't the only way to make that happen. The Twins have some interesting pieces on the farm and few of them are the love children of Falvey/Levine. It will be interesting to see how they mould the organization into their vision. I hope we're surprised this offseason and they trade some of the farm for immediate pitching help.

 

Or go even further and deal Dozier possibly Santana in the offseason for more prospects to add to the stock pile they already have.   

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

The odds that Santana passes through waivers to someone that would work out a trade with the Twins is next to zero.

Not sure about that.  It certainly wouldn't surprise me if someone claimed Ervin on trade waivers.  But you also have to keep in mind, there is a gentleman's agreement not to claim players unless you are willing to negotiate in good faith.  Ervin might fall in a gray area here -- the Twins apparently have stuck to a decent asking price as far back as July 2016, and no one has thus far met it.

 

As far as blocking from rivals, Ervin may not be quite a talent worth blocking anymore either, especially with his recent slump and 2017 peripherals.  And upon closer inspection, I am not even sure what rivals would want to block him, or from whom they would be blocking.  A lot of division leaders already have huge leads, there's not much for other teams to "block" there.  A number of teams have probably already acquired the SP they want.  The Yankees and Rays are probably unable to add him anymore, for payroll / luxury tax reasons, even if they wanted to.  For whatever reason, Arizona was not very active on the trade market -- would the Rockies feel any need to block them? And so on and so forth.

 

A few teams could certainly use him, but those teams might think it is more prudent to pass on a waiver claim and hope that the Twins asking price comes down over the course of the month.  Which is frankly probably how Ervin cleared August waivers last year -- yeah, he had an extra year and $13.5 mil on his deal at the time, but he was also a year younger, without the poor 2017 peripheral trends, and on a heck of a roll late last year.  It's admittedly a low probability that the Twins asking price would go down, but otherwise, if a team claims him now, and the Twins don't budge from their asking price over the next 48 hours, he's off the market for good, with absolutely zero chance of that team acquiring him later.

[DaveW]

Santana's complete game today IMO shows that he would most certainly be "blocked"

 

There are like a million teams in the wild card hunt, he would make a ton of sense for the Mariners for example, but would likely get claimed from a few teams before them.

[Otto von Ballpark]

The Padres offense has scored the fewest runs in MLB this season. The game was in Petco. I doubt this start has significant meaning.

 

Ervin was one of the most effective SP in baseball July into August last year, yet still went unclaimed by teams who doubtlessly would not have minded being "stuck" with his remaining 2 years at the time. August waiver claims aren't just about claiming every player you want, teams generally respect the asking price of the waiving team when making their claims. If the Twins asking price is still high for Santana, he could very well go unclaimed.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Of the 6 teams ahead of the Twins in the AL wild card race, I'm not sure any could realistically complete a trade for Ervin Santana right now.

 

Yankees - already acquired 2 SP, luxury tax?

Royals - already acquired a SP, no prospects, budget?

Rays - extremely small budget, have lots of SP anyway

Mariners, Orioles, Angels - have very weak farm systems, former 2 already traded for pitchers, Angels already straddling the sell line

 

Given 48 hours to complete a deal with the Twins for Ervin today, I'd put the odds near zero for every one of these teams. So it is doubtful any would feel the need to "block" such an unlikely result. Best play might be to let him go unclaimed, and hope circumstances / asking price changes in their favor over the next month.

 

Over in the NL, most races are decided already.

 

Arizona - already has 5 pretty good SP

Rockies

Cubs - already have 5 pretty good SP, including one just acquired

Brewers - fading, already 2.5 back of the Cubs and 5.5 back of the Rockies

 

Don't see any really likely dealmakers today there either. The Rockies and Brewers could use him, but both also don't seem eager to move top prospects right now. Would they rather have 48 hours to meet the Twins current price, or the whole month to hope the circumstances/price changes?

 

Again, I wouldn't be surprised if someone put in a claim, but I don't think it is guaranteed either. There are a lot more considerations here than just "can I use him?" or "do I not want others to have him?"