How Much More Time Does Carlos Santana Have?

[jorgenswest]

4 hours ago, USAFChief said:

Pro tip: before posting in this thread, check the following article to make sure you weren't "for it before you were against it."

 

I think I am in the same place but two months feels longer in the midst than it did before the season.

“I am more concerned about the decisions to retain acquire players at an age where decline is a real possibility and might be retained. After two months of the season if Santana, Farmer or DeSclafini have dropped off they need to release them. They are really betting on spreading the dollars on those three aging players rather than getting one better player with the dollars and filling the other two spots from within. I hope the bet pays off. ”

[Guest]

Okay everybody, be prepared to get out your thumbs down response.

You would have thought that the Twins FO, having an analytical mind set, would have foreseen all this and not wasted the money. Either they made the move to make a move (like it was stated above), or they are desperate and were hoping Santana could bail their ass out of the fire.

Regardless of their motives it brings me to a more global issue: the stupid guaranteed contract. I wish so much that all players received a significant increase in minimum salary and then more based on their performance.  For example, Buxton would not be guaranteed 15 million, why should he be? If he performs then he gets bigger money. I am so tired of baseball players reaping millions of dollars and not contributing to the team's success. Remember Carlos Rodon. Many were hoping the Twins would sign him, the Yankees did. To a six year, $162 million contract. And for that the Yankees got 14 starts of BAD pitching in 2023. He was bad, Bad, BAD. He did not deserve whatever he was paid in 2023. HE DID HOWEVER DESERVE A SIGNIFICANT BASE PAY SALARY, because that is the way I believe.

This brings us back to Santana. If anyone thinks 5.25 million is a deserving number for his performance, please speak up.

Ultimately some owners say that 50% of revenue is put towards player salary. In my hope of hopes I would like to see this happen and the books opened up. At that time, ALL teams must do this. ALL players receive and base salary from the teams and the remain revenue is transferred to the UNION and they can disburse the money based on their definition player performance.

Like I said, get your thumbs down ready, especially the one you has given me the most thumbs down, Squirrel.

[D.C Twins]

4 hours ago, USAFChief said:

Summary: Mike Sixel, feel free to rip away.

The rest of you...careful

 

I'm clean!

[USAFChief]

3 hours ago, stringer bell said:

It's a data point, I guess. Santana has been traded several times and signed one-year free agent contracts, but has always been a full-time player. He was coming off his best season in several years. I don't know if any promises about playing time were made (I would hope not), but all Santana has ever done is show up and play.

I have posted in game threads, more than once, that I would wager Santana leads the 2024 Twins in PAs.

I was semi-joking....but only semi-.

The braintrust wanted him at 1st, pretty much full time. And of all the Twins, it's ironic but makes sense to me...he's the least likely to miss time with injury. 

 

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

MLB needs a new way to allocate players to all the various teams. The current system isn’t very fair to the Twins.

Pohlad should bring this topic up at the next owners meeting, see what some of the other owners have to say about it. 🙂

[Mike Sixel]

53 minutes ago, Verified Member said:

Okay everybody, be prepared to get out your thumbs down response.

You would have thought that the Twins FO, having an analytical mind set, would have foreseen all this and not wasted the money. Either they made the move to make a move (like it was stated above), or they are desperate and were hoping Santana could bail their ass out of the fire.

Regardless of their motives it brings me to a more global issue: the stupid guaranteed contract. I wish so much that all players received a significant increase in minimum salary and then more based on their performance.  For example, Buxton would not be guaranteed 15 million, why should he be? If he performs then he gets bigger money. I am so tired of baseball players reaping millions of dollars and not contributing to the team's success. Remember Carlos Rodon. Many were hoping the Twins would sign him, the Yankees did. To a six year, $162 million contract. And for that the Yankees got 14 starts of BAD pitching in 2023. He was bad, Bad, BAD. He did not deserve whatever he was paid in 2023. HE DID HOWEVER DESERVE A SIGNIFICANT BASE PAY SALARY, because that is the way I believe.

This brings us back to Santana. If anyone thinks 5.25 million is a deserving number for his performance, please speak up.

Ultimately some owners say that 50% of revenue is put towards player salary. In my hope of hopes I would like to see this happen and the books opened up. At that time, ALL teams must do this. ALL players receive and base salary from the teams and the remain revenue is transferred to the UNION and they can disburse the money based on their definition player performance.

Like I said, get your thumbs down ready, especially the one you has given me the most thumbs down, Squirrel.

So players can opt out any time and be free agents, any time? What's good for one is good for other

[gil4]

5 hours ago, USAFChief said:

Summary: Mike Sixel, feel free to rip away.

The rest of you...careful

 

The only comment of mine I could find on the subject was under the Randballs Stu "Carlos Santana vs. Carlos Santana: KNOW THE DIFFERENCE!" article, where we tag-teamed  "Another way to tell them apart: one is old enough to have been at Woodstock /  and the other plays guitar."

Not exactly a ringing endorsement, although I'm not above setting aside what I really think if there is a joke to be made.  I didn't like the signing, but I didn't hate it, either.  The Nelson Cruz signing bought some good will for the signing of older guys.

[CrossCheckRepublic]

6 hours ago, Parfigliano said:

It was a move made in order to be seen making a move and not just standing still.  It was a dumb waste of money by a team cutting payroll making it doubly dumb.

That said and with this teams past history they wont move off him until mid June.

Not sure how you managed to typo "next off-season" into to that, but I agree

[jkcarew]

2 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

5 years ago is skipping a lot of time to make this point. In 2020 he got 7 mil. In 2021 he got 7.25 mil. In 2022 he got 10.5. In 2023 he got 6.6 mil. He was a fulltime player in all of those seasons. Looking at his pay from 5 years ago and saying he got a significant pay cut and tying that to a significant decrease in role while ignoring the fact that he took only a 1.5 mil pay cut from just last season when he was a fulltime player for 2 teams is awfully skewed data. He hasn't been making big money for quite some time but he's still been a fulltime player.

So, the question becomes…who thought Santana was signed to be a full-time 1B even WITH a healthy Kirilloff?…in the lineup every day against righties and lefties…and then still liked the signing? Anyone?

I sure didn’t. And I would have hated the signing if I had expected that.

[RpR]

20 minutes ago, jkcarew said:

So, the question becomes…who thought Santana was signed to be a full-time 1B even WITH a healthy Kirilloff?…in the lineup every day against righties and lefties…and then still liked the signing? Anyone?

I sure didn’t. And I would have hated the signing if I had expected that.

Santana was signed for improved defense at First Base, only reason.

[USAFChief]

21 minutes ago, jkcarew said:

So, the question becomes…who thought Santana was signed to be a full-time 1B even WITH a healthy Kirilloff?…in the lineup every day against righties and lefties…and then still liked the signing? Anyone?

 

Falvine and Rocco.

[chpettit19]

21 minutes ago, jkcarew said:

So, the question becomes…who thought Santana was signed to be a full-time 1B even WITH a healthy Kirilloff?…in the lineup every day against righties and lefties…and then still liked the signing? Anyone?

I sure didn’t. And I would have hated the signing if I had expected that.

I don't know many fans at all who were happy with the idea of him being an everyday guy. But the Twins pretty early on stated the guy with the best glove would play 1B the most and there was no doubt at all that that was Santana. And they had an open DH spot so it was pretty universally expected after that comment that Santana was the everyday 1B and Kirilloff the primary DH against righties. And I know very few people who liked that idea. Mostly just people who significantly overweigh defense at 1B.

[jkcarew]

4 minutes ago, RpR said:

Santana was signed for improved defense at First Base, only reason.

Unique. Not usually considered a premium defensive position…but, apparently a true statement.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Mike Sixel said:

So players can opt out any time and be free agents, any time? What's good for one is good for other

After they earn free agency, yes, why not? The Yankees and Dodgers are still going to get you they want. Fandom has boiled down to bring faithful to a jersey (ownership). Do you feel that Sonny Gray is a true blue Twin?

[gil4]

51 minutes ago, CrossCheckRepublic said:

Not sure how you managed to typo "next off-season" into to that, but I agree

That might not be a typo. If things don't turn around, mid-June might be the start of next off-season. 
(I think things will turn around.)

[jorgenswest]

23 minutes ago, jkcarew said:

So, the question becomes…who thought Santana was signed to be a full-time 1B even WITH a healthy Kirilloff?…in the lineup every day against righties and lefties…and then still liked the signing? Anyone?

I sure didn’t. And I would have hated the signing if I had expected that.

They only have 4 bench spots so at least 5 players need to be every day players. Those 5 were likely Correa, Lewis, Buxton, Kepler and Polanco prior to the Polanco trade. That is in the best of circumstances with everyone healthy. Once Polanco was traded they lost an everyday bat. Even after signing Santana I was still advocating for an everyday bat. Others including Twins podcasters saw it different advocating for a right handed platoon outfielder instead. We got Margot and it was clear that Santana was the 5th everyday bat. At least the Twins have their beloved flexibility at DH.

[Mike Sixel]

8 minutes ago, Verified Member said:

After they earn free agency, yes, why not? The Yankees and Dodgers are still going to get you they want. Fandom has boiled down to bring faithful to a jersey (ownership). Do you feel that Sonny Gray is a true blue Twin?

The post I responded to said no guaranteed contacts because players that play badly shouldn't get paid. In that situation, players that play well should be able to void their deal any time and sign with whomever they want, whenever they want. Just like every other employee in the US. No guarantees on one side means no guarantees on the other. 

[jkcarew]

7 minutes ago, jorgenswest said:

Those 5 were likely Correa, Lewis, Buxton, Kepler and Polanco prior to the Polanco trade. That is in the best of circumstances with everyone healthy. Once Polanco was traded they lost an everyday bat

I didn’t see it that way at all. You had 5 everyday bats with or without Polanco…either Polanco or Julien. There was zero chance Julien wasn’t going to be a starter…IMO.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Mike Sixel said:

The post I responded to said no guaranteed contacts because players that play badly shouldn't get paid. In that situation, players that play well should be able to void their deal any time and sign with whomever they want, whenever they want. Just like every other employee in the US. No guarantees on one side means no guarantees on the other. 

Don’t be obstinate for the sake of being obstinate. Try to bring a little common sense to the discussion.

[Mike Sixel]

Just now, Verified Member said:

Don’t be obstinate for the sake of being obstinate. Try to bring a little common sense to the discussion.

Either there are no guarantees, or there are. It is completely unfair to one side to have all the power, I'm not being obstinate at all. I'm being serious. If teams can not pay players, players should also be free to leave and go someplace else. It's a stupid idea, which I rarely say on line anymore, but his idea is bad, bad, bad for players.

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

Either there are no guarantees, or there are. It is completely unfair to one side to have all the power, I'm not being obstinate at all. I'm being serious. If teams can not pay players, players should also be free to leave and go someplace else. It's a stupid idea, which I rarely say on line anymore, but his idea is bad, bad, bad for players.

It is stupid to base a players salary based on their current year’s performance for their current team instead of paying for previous performance ? As you have posted many, many, many times, “Wow, just wow.”

[Reptevia]

Based on the history of this FO, I would think August before they even consider sitting/releasing him. 

[Mike Sixel]

6 minutes ago, Verified Member said:

It is stupid to base a players salary based on their current year’s performance for their current team instead of paying for previous performance ? As you have posted many, many, many times, “Wow, just wow.”

You negotiate what both sides feel is a fair deal, before anyone plays....there is zero pay for performance in pro sports beyond small tiny bonuses. That's how it works. Sometimes it works for one side or the other....or for both sides. Just like any other transaction.

[jorgenswest]

21 minutes ago, jkcarew said:

I didn’t see it that way at all. You had 5 everyday bats with or without Polanco…either Polanco or Julien. There was zero chance Julien wasn’t going to be a starter…IMO.

Julien was in a platoon the moment they tendered Farmer. Julien didn’t even start opening day. 

[Guest]

45 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

You negotiate what both sides feel is a fair deal, before anyone plays....there is zero pay for performance in pro sports beyond small tiny bonuses. That's how it works. Sometimes it works for one side or the other....or for both sides. Just like any other transaction.

You must have missed that in my original post I stated what I wished and proposed an alternative. Ultimately you boil it down to stating that this is how it works now, and apparently you may accept that it should be like this in the future. Things don’t change if you do not imagine a different way. What a waste of time for you and me. Next time just give me your thumbs down and move on.

[Riverbrian]

1 hour ago, jkcarew said:

I didn’t see it that way at all. You had 5 everyday bats with or without Polanco…either Polanco or Julien. There was zero chance Julien wasn’t going to be a starter…IMO.

Julien, Kirilloff and Wallner didn't start against left handers last year and opening day against a left hander... same thing... Julien, Kirilloff and Wallner were out of the lineup. It was intended to be more of the same but then... of course... injuries got in the way. 

Injuries has forced Rocco to let Julien hit left handers but it took a third injury for Rocco to finally cry uncle and turn to Julien and say... well I didn't trust you before but I have to trust you know.

Kirilloff and Wallner Larnach still won't start against lefties because he still has the right handed cover by the hair of his chinny chin chin. 

I will bet with anyone willing to take the bet... that if everyone got healthy bringing the band back together... Julien would go right back into his platoon role and on the bench against lefties. 

It's really easy to see how the roster set up in the offseason. 

Lewis, Correa, Buxton, Kepler and Santana are the 5 primarily every day players. 

Julien/Farmer

Kirilloff/Margot

Wallner/Castro are 6 platoon players. 

and two catchers of course for a total of 13

Jorgenswest is right on the money.

The front office purposely set up this roster to strictly platoon as much as the roster will allow. Using 6 for this purpose leaves 5 players with every day jobs. Santana is one of those guys. 

It's really really easy to see. Rocco doesn't leave the script until injuries forced him to and now we are scrambling big time. 

[Patzky]

Guess he earned a few more starts after tonight. Does Carlos read this column?

[Doctor Wu]

19 hours ago, thelanges5 said:

Just like Gallo last year 👎🏻

Gallo now batting a robust .143 for the Nationals. But he's learned how to take walks again, giving him an OBP of .316.  Not a player we will miss. 

[Jeff K]

20 hours ago, Twins_Fan_in_NJ said:

I thought Santana was going to be good for a 20 HRs, a discerning eye at the plate and solid defense at 1B. He didn't just fall off a cliff. He feel into the Grand Canyon. In hindsight, re-signing Solano at half the price and using the leftovers for someone like Lorenzen would've been the move. But, alas. 

Big mistake not resigning Solano...and he wanted to be here!

[Heiny]

Regardless of what was expected of Santana, Rocco continues to play him.  He may be the worst hitting 1B in the league where Kirilloff has been one of our better hitters. Santana, in my opinion, is clearly over the hill.  His defense is not so much better than Kirilloffs as to make him a regular starter.  He has been nearly an automatic out.  So, the question was, "How much more time does Carlos Santana have left?"  I would hope very little.  When injured players start to return,  Santana should be one of the first to be let go.  Congrats on a very good career, but it should be over before June.  And he can take Rocco with him.