Ervin Santana Is Legit

Lots on here have been saying keep unless it's a big return... Well, that's up to interpretation right? Erv Santana is not Chris Sale, so that kind of haul isn't realistic.

I said earlier that if the offer is a top 100 SP prospect + a young (18-21) positional prospect or 2 would be enough to pull the trigger.

What do people mean by big return?

Van, I think the powers that be should stand pat unless they get a killer offer. I think not dealing Dozier was probably the right move in the off-season. It may very well turn out not making a deal for Santan is the best way to go, too. Overall, with the results the Twins are getting from Santana, it might be a good thing to keep him for next year. Barring injury, I can see another really good year after this year. If it looks like the staff has solidified with the addition of Santiago and Meija, there may not be any reason to move Santana. If anything, Gibson or Hughes should be worrying about getting outright cut, should Berrios continue to dominate.

That will be .02 cents, please.

but that's the issue with trading away pitching isn't it? Depth is thin, so you can't really trade it away unless you're getting back 2 close to major league ready pitchers. That's tough to swing.

That was my argument during the offseason, that there was no way the return could be better than what Santana will offer. The holes were just too big.

But as time goes on and people move through the pipeline and as Santana's contract gets closer to the end, it starts to make sense to move him. 

I think it's a valid point of discussion for anyone who has been caught using.  How much did he benefit?  How long do the benefits last? What is the risk for a 2nd suspension? 

 

I have more sympathy for international players caught using PEDs because the laws and product availability in their countries often make it easy to accidentally take something that isn't approved.  I also have lived in Germany and Belgium, and I know what a pain it is to have to try to read fine print in a language that is not your own, even when there is a support structure in place.

 

Still, MLB has no such sympathy, and if he slips again it 1 year, I believe.  That's going to be a factor in evaluating his value.

I agree. It's not just a valid discussion but an essential discussion and it will be an extremely interesting one.

But I think it's still too early, people are still too passionate about it, ballplayers and teams are still unwilling to talk about it. At some point someone will write a great, comprehensive book about what happened.

I think we will find that the return for Santana is less than we all wish it would beat the deadline. I don't think we will (or should) trade him unless it really is that huge return that we hope for so I think he will be here for the season.

Intuition?

I beg to differ.  If he continues to pitch like this and is shopped around at the deadline i'm sure he will fetch a fair value.  He has an option year still.  I don't understand the pessimism about his value.  Were not talking about Brian Dozier here. 

Dealing short term controlled vets in down years seems like one ideal way to do that.  

I would agree, for any team but the Twins. As a fan of the team I want them to not suck now. Trading Santana for something in the future makes the Twins suck more now, in hopes of sucking less in the future. Or maybe I'm just not confident in the front office because I forget that JR isn't running the team anymore?

There are only 7 MLB pitchers that have begun the season with 4 straight quality starts; Syndergaard, Bumgarner, Sale, Strasburg, Keuchel, Duffy, and ERVIN SANTANA. 

Santana's the only guy from that list I would have predicted on opening day.

Yeah, kind of a dull list;)

It is quite interesting how quickly things change.

During the offseason some/many didn't see the need any additional #3 upside starters in the high minors and now the Twins have literally nobody behind Berrios (or Mejia) to call up.

During the offseason there was a sentiment that since Ervin was older and not likely to be part of winning teams that he should be dealt regardless what the return was. The same was said of Santiago, Hughes and Gibson to some extent since we needed to get prospects into rotation to see what they had. May is injured, Duffey might be staying in the pen, Gonsalves is injured and Jay moved to the pen. Nearly zero depth.

Now the Twins have no depth at SP and retaining Santana and Santiago look like great moves. Gibson and Hughes are rather indifferent moves but somebody needs to pitch and the Twins don't have many options.

For the record I would trade Santana (and would have this offseason) for a top 50 prospect and a top 200-ish (or two) flyers. With a strong preference towards starters obviously. Otherwise definitely hang onto Santana but the end will come harshly. So far he has gotten better with age but 35+ pitchers don't have a great track record.

This why I still hope for a Dozier trade. They lack for starters throughout the organization so trading is really the only solution.

I am wary of trending down the "what could we get in a trade" road.  But I'll say this: A good return with a Top 50 pitching prospect in it may not make you fall out of your chair.  "Good return", thanks to Dozier this offseason, seems to have morphed into "blow me away" territory.

 

A top 50 SP prospect and one or two other guys with upside is what I'd look for.  The closer to the majors the better.

I agree, but this is why I think they retain him. We may have too many sellers at the deadline, too much inventory available, to extract this kind of overpay for him. But for me, and I hope for Falvey, there's no great benefit in trading him for some prospect that projects as just another league-average starter. So I think Falvey keeps him, through his option year even.

I would look at this way, I think Santana has a decent chance of being good through his contract. While the Twins likely aren't making the playoffs this year, I think they can make another move in 18 and 19.

If I'm going to move Santana I want something that will clearly build towards that. Otherwise I'd roll with Santana.

Maybe my expectations are unrealistic, but I also don't see a huge need to move him, so I want it to be worthwhile. Maybe that package isn't there.

Exactly this for me too. The main piece has to be a frontline starter, a guy who projects as a #2-3, not a guy with a #3 ceiling. The closest thing we have to an acceptable main piece in our system? Berrios might tempt me, if Lewin Diaz, Blankenhorn, or a similar top 150-200 prospect was offered as the second piece, which would be mandatory for me because of the injury risk I'm assuming with the main piece. But I can see why some would move him at the deadline for a Fernando Romero/Rortvedt type package. And I suspect that's the kind of offer they see, if that even.