Master Index of Archived Threads


Oye Como Va

Frayed Knot Nov 24 2007 09:03 AM

The yearly talk about whatever potential BIG TRADE is thought to be on tap always drives me a bit nuts as most of the "info" out there is at least 9 parts baseless speculation for evey one part actual fact. But it's getting to the point where it's worth tracking whatever's happening on the Johan Santana front as things might actually be starting to heat up. * Various reports (from SI's Jon Heyman among others) have him turning down offers from the Twins for 5 yrs @ $93 mil and most recently 4/$80, leading to speculation that he's pricing himself out of Minnesota and towards being dealt this winter. * FOX Sports' [url=http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/7480346]Ken Rosenthal suggests[/url] that it'll take around 7 yrs @ $140 (as a minimum!) to sign him - although it's not clear where that number comes from except maybe that it's a nice round number and an extrapolation from Zito's 7/126 from last year. * Santana already has complete no-trade protection and the always popular "source with knowledge of his thinking" says that Johan would almost certainly insist on signing a long-term deal with whatever trading partner comes up as a condition of approving a trade even though most players specifically DON'T want to lock themselves into just one club a year before being able to negotiate with all 30 for the first time in their careers. Of course it's also up to the Twins whether they want to agree to grant their trading partner such a window to negotiate a new deal after agreeing to a trade. Also the commish's office will need to approve. That add-on usually slows up potential deals but also means a better return to his team. * And then there's the matter of trading chips before you ever get to that point. "Rival executives" say that the Twins want at least one "big name major leaguer" - mentioning the likes of Reyes & Cano - and presumably several prospects as well. Happy hunting.

Edgy DC Nov 24 2007 12:23 PM

My All-Santana Thread never had a chance. I see seven years for a pitcher, I see Mike Hampton. I say no.

smg58 Nov 24 2007 01:22 PM

According to Rotoworld, the 5 for $93M offer from the Twins was just a four-year extension, with next year already guaranteed at $13M, so the two reported offers are actually the same. The counteroffer from Santana was apparently six years and $126M. The contract doesn't scare me, but the combination of the contract and the emptying out of the farm system makes me nervous. A trade involving a significant big leaguer would not improve this year's team enough to justify the cost. I'd offer Pelfrey, Gomez, and either A) Martinez or B) Guerra and Gotay. If the Twins bite, great; if not, I hold my cards and look elsewhere.

duan Nov 24 2007 01:30 PM

what about maine/perez? should we be prepared to give one of them up and if so which?

Edgy DC Nov 24 2007 02:39 PM

I guess so. Which one? Start with which one do they want?

Benjamin Grimm Nov 24 2007 05:12 PM

I think I'd yield Maine before I would Perez. But if that's what it takes to get Santana, I think I'd prefer to set my sights on one of the Oakland guys instead.

duan Nov 26 2007 01:23 PM

I'd be prepared to go Your CHOICE OF Milledge & Humber/Pelfrey Maine/Perez & Gomez PLUS AN OTHER (in the AN Other section i'm thinking along the lines of a Gotay) for Santana. alllowing for negotiation of the contract extension. I reckon that's about as far as I can go with ML Ready/ML Upside talent, prospects lower down the track you could swap in/out as far as i'm concerned.

Benjamin Grimm Nov 26 2007 01:41 PM

So, not Maine/Perez and Milledge? I wonder if Endy Chavez might be appealing to the Twins as the "major league position player" they're looking for. It's possible that they'd have an inflated opinion of Endy and if so, that could be to the Mets advantage. I don't think the Mets have enough young but established talent (beyond Reyes and Wright, of course) to bring Santana to Flushing. I guess they might also like Heilman or Feliciano or maybe even Smith.

smg58 Nov 26 2007 02:49 PM

Who knows? The fact that whoever deals for Santana will be giving up prospects in addition to inking the most expensive contract ever for a pitcher should make the the trading price less than it would look at face value. And if the A's put the much cheaper Haren and Blanton on the block, the Twins would be forced to ask for even less. Endy's one year from free agency. So is Oliver Perez. It would make no sense for the Twins to take either of them for Santana.

duan Nov 27 2007 03:54 AM

I don't think i'd part with Milledge & Maine. Right now our rotation is Martinez, Hernandez, Maine & Perez plus AN OTHER Right now our outfield is Alou, Beltran, Milledge & Chavez If you take out two of Maine & Milledge you need to sign two free agents to make up. Right now the cost of a 'low end John Maine' looks to be about 5 years and 60 million. Replacing Milledge probably costs less in terms of money & years but more in terms of lost upside. This mets team is nicely set up to contend for another 3/4 years due to a core of Wright, Reyes & Beltran. However replacing from within is proving to be far more efficient then Free Agency at the moment (due to the hugely escalating salaries) therefore the premium on younger talent has actually got higher. There's no doubt in my mind that Maine & Milledge can be key components in a championship winning team, I can't say the same about Pelfrey, Humber & Gomez. If the twins came and said to us, Millege, Maine & AN Other for Santana would I do it? I'd think about it, think very hard and try and come up with an answer but right now, I'm not able to do it. The point smg makes about Oliver Perez is noted, though there is a "stay contending at a lower cost and get future upside aswell" combo in the twins acquiring (say) Oliver Perez, Gomez and Gotay.

smg58 Nov 27 2007 06:15 AM

Plus I don't think that giving up significant major league talent for Santana would lead to enough of a net benefit right now to justify the deal.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Nov 27 2007 06:59 AM

]If the twins came and said to us, Millege, Maine & AN Other for Santana would I do it? I'd think about it, think very hard and try and come up with an answer but right now, I'm not able to do it. Now how is that gonna "stick it to the Yankees"?!? You may all wanna beat me up but I hope Santana signs a big old contract with the Twins. I'm rooting for the Mets to do something that actually takes brains. You know, surrender less in prospects in a trade for an under-the-radar guy like Ian Snell or the Twins' Garza and let them all talk. The Skanks' pursuit of Santana gets a Snooze back cover but the story is all magic quotes at this point, with speculation being Melky, Hughes + to start.

metirish Nov 27 2007 07:19 AM

I'd not be upset at all if Santana signed with the Twins, good for them I'd say, read the Snooze article, seems like Hank has a big mouth and no doubt soon he'll be issuing the Twins a take it or leave it ultimatum .

soupcan Nov 27 2007 07:19 AM

I'm leaning towards Lunchbucket's view. Let the Yankees give up the farm and overspend for 7 years this guy.

Edgy DC Nov 27 2007 07:27 AM

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: You may all wanna beat me up but I hope Santana signs a big old contract with the Twins. Amen. John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: I'm rooting for the Mets to do something that actually takes brains. Preach on, Brother Mellancamp. John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: You know, surrender less in prospects in a trade for an under-the-radar guy like Ian Snell or the Twins' Garza and let them all talk. I was thinking beating the tar out of everybody with players they spotted as 104-pound 16-year-olds six years ago, and patiently developed into the best crack unit of National Leaguers since Frank Chance's Cubs of 1906-1910.

Edgy DC Nov 27 2007 11:49 AM

Braves Beat writer Dave O'Brien's story hasn't run yet, but he posted it to his blog anyhow. Exhibit A (well, A-7) on seven-year deals to pitchers: By DAVID O’BRIEN It’s a familiar refrain, this time from south of the border: Mike Hampton is hurt again. The Braves left-hander injured his right hamstring in the first inning of his first start in the Mexican Winter League last week. He left after one inning, and it’s uncertain if he’ll pitch again this winter. “We don’t know when he’ll come back [in winter ball], if at all,” Braves general manager Frank Wren said. “There’s only four weeks left in the season, and hamstring injuries usually take a while.” Hampton, 35, has missed the past two seasons recovering from elbow surgeries on his pitching arm, and the Braves hoped he could make seven starts in Mexico to better gauge the likelihood of having him back in Atlanta’s starting rotation for the 2008 season. But the injury in Thursday’s start for Navojoa was another reminder of why the Braves say they aren’t counting on Hampton - not like they were counting on him a year ago at this time. “We’re cautiously optimistic that Mike can bounce back and be a starter,” Wren said. “But it’s simple as this: there’s no guarantees.” The Braves don’t plan to pursue another starter this winter. They say that even without Hampton, they’d have seven other pitchers vying for their five-man rotation. John Smoltz, Tim Hudson and Tom Glavine are penciled in at the top. Hampton will have the fourth spot if healthy, and incumbent Chuck James would have competition for the fifth spot from rookies Jo-Jo Reyes and Jair Jurrjens and September surprise Jeff Bennett. Hampton hurt his right hamstring when he came off the mound to make a play near the end of the first inning Thursday. He tried to keep his leg loose and come back for a second inning, but the pain worsened in warm-ups before the inning, and he left the game. Wren said Hampton called him Friday and told him the bad news, and the GM was informed by trainers that the muscle had “bled out,” usually a sign of something more than a mild strain. Hampton is owed $15 million in 2008, the final season of an eight-year, $121 million contract he signed with Colorado. He was traded to Atlanta after the 2002 season in a three-way deal with Florida. The Braves were responsible for $48.5 million of his salary during 2003-08, but insurance covered part of it the past two seasons. Wren said insurance would again pay part of it again if Hampton is DL’d in 2008. The Braves have never disclosed how much of Hampton’s salary has been covered by insurance while on the disabled list; the amount was believed to be between 40-60 percent on a prorated basis. Hampton has had eight stints on the disabled list since being traded to the Braves after the 2002 season. He hasn’t pitched in a game stateside since 2005, when he was 5-3 with a 3.50 ERA in 12 starts before blowing out his elbow and having Tommy John ligament-transplant surgery.

Centerfield Nov 29 2007 08:28 AM

The News has a big headline on its backpage that says "NEVER SAY NO WAY, JOSE" implying that the Mets would include him in a deal for Santana. When you read the article, however, that's precisely what the Mets are saying, stating that Reyes, Wright, and Beltran are going nowhere. I think they'd be crazy to even consider moving Reyes for Santana. If that's what it takes, I say trade for Dan Haren, get a rightfielder and get ready for spring training.

Edgy DC Nov 29 2007 08:34 AM

The thing about Reyes is that, if he doesn't get better, he's still (a) a bargain at his salary, (b) performing at a level that the Mets have never gotten at shortstop, ever. The internet consipiracy is that they'd replace him by swooping in and grabbing the Rod from the Yankees. That's crazy talk.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Nov 29 2007 08:35 AM

They interpret the Delmon Young trade as creating a shortstop void in MN, making the Mets a "perfect fit." I'll say it again, F Santana.

smg58 Nov 29 2007 09:30 AM

Brendan Harris is no match for Bartlett with the glove, but he hits well for the position, and if you think the plus/minus stat from the Fielding Bible ([url]http://www.fieldingbible.com/[/url]) is a fairly objective measure, it's not like he was the worst defensive shortstop in the AL East (snicker). Yes his glove is an issue, but he's not unplayable. I had a feeling when I saw the deal that somebody would suggest that this makes room for Reyes, but I still don't see it. I think Reyes is in trade rumors for the same reason that Heilman was in so many last year; people are blaming him for what the whole team didn't accomplish.

Nymr83 Nov 29 2007 10:51 AM

Centerfield wrote: The News has a big headline on its backpage that says "NEVER SAY NO WAY, JOSE" implying that the Mets would include him in a deal for Santana. When you read the article, however, that's precisely what the Mets are saying, stating that Reyes, Wright, and Beltran are going nowhere. The Post says "NO WAY JOSE- Mets won't give up Reyes" in a small picture on the front and on the back a full page picture of Reyes and Omar that says "Can't touch this" making clear what the article says- the Mets will not deal Jose Reyes.

soupcan Nov 29 2007 11:03 AM

soupcan says: "The Hills Are Alive With The Sound Of Music"

Valadius Nov 29 2007 09:18 PM

From Omar himself: ]Mets GM Omar Minaya says he won't trade All-Star SS Jose Reyes By MIKE FITZPATRICK, AP Baseball Writer November 29, 2007 NEW YORK (AP) -- The New York Mets need pitching and they'd love to land Johan Santana. Not enough to trade star shortstop Jose Reyes, though. "Jose Reyes is one of our core players," general manager Omar Minaya said Thursday. "I don't see us trading Jose Reyes for one of those guys being mentioned. It just doesn't make sense for us." The Minnesota Twins are listening to trade offers for Santana, a two-time Cy Young Award winner who can become a free agent after next season. The Mets are one of several big-budget teams thought to be interested, including the New York Yankees, Boston Red Sox, Los Angeles Dodgers and Los Angeles Angels. The Mets think they might have a package of prospects that could bring back a top starting pitcher, but Minnesota may want the 24-year-old Reyes included in any potential deal for Santana. "All those guys that are being mentioned in the market, as far as trade market, we've been in contact with these guys, on a regular basis," Minaya said. "No club has told us, hey, forget it, you're not in. Now maybe they have told us, hey, for you to be in, you have to have this player. And we can say, hey, well thank you very much, but we're not going to be in with this player's name in it." A two-time All-Star, Reyes batted .280 with 12 homers, 57 RBIs and 119 runs this season. He also led the major leagues with 78 stolen bases, the third straight year he's topped the NL in that category. But he slumped in the second half as New York blew a big NL East lead and missed the playoffs after a historic collapse. While Santana would undoubtedly boost the suspect rotation, trading Reyes would diminish the Mets' lineup and leave them with a huge hole at shortstop. "I can't comment on Santana," Minaya said. "We're very happy with Jose Reyes." Notes Minaya said RHP Orlando Hernandez will be a starter next season and RHP Jorge Sosa is expected to work out of the bullpen. ... Minaya also said reliever Duaner Sanchez, recovering from a right shoulder injury, is throwing well in Florida and his velocity is up to 88-90 mph. ... New York's season opener at Florida was moved from April 1 to March 31.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Nov 29 2007 09:38 PM

I wouldn't necessarily advocate this. In fact, I'm not advocating it. But if the Mets really wanted to trade Reyes, they could do a bold ting and flip him to Baltimore in a deal for Bedard and Tejada. Wham.

Gwreck Nov 29 2007 09:56 PM

I don't see how that's "bold." Tejada's about a year away from needing to be converted to 1B.

TransMonk Nov 29 2007 09:59 PM

Delgado's coming up on his last year. SC=29.654

Centerfield Dec 03 2007 01:30 PM

According to various reports, Santana might be a two-horse race now between the Red Sox and MFY's. Loser might end up trading for Dan Haren, if they see fit because Billy Beane is said to be looking for a similar package for his ace.

Frayed Knot Dec 03 2007 01:57 PM

The thing is that, while Haren isn't nearly as good, the fact that he comes pre-signed at fairly reasonable rates means that the package needed to get the two might well be very similar.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 03 2007 02:11 PM

Lotsa stuff out there. Best is Twins officials looking into tampering charges given Hank Steinbrenner's latest empty threat.

Frayed Knot Dec 04 2007 11:26 AM

Yanx officials at Nashville believe Santana headed to Boston (as per WFAN reporter Sweeny Murti) ... though nothing official yet.

Frayed Knot Dec 04 2007 08:18 PM

Hank Steiny tells the NYTimes that they are O-U-T of the Santana sweepstakes. Of course they had cut ties with ARod too ... Angels also are apparently telling folks that they've broken off talks with Mini-soda concerning Johan (Sebastian) Santana

metsmarathon Dec 04 2007 08:22 PM

if the yankees have indeed pulled out of the santana running over some overly early and curt deadline, allowing him to either reach the sox on the (slightly) cheap via trade or hit the free agent market next year, then hank might just become my favorite owner in all of sport.

Frayed Knot Dec 05 2007 01:43 PM

SI.com's Jon Heyman (who, btw, has recently struck a deal with WFAN to be their regular all-purpose baseball contact) reports that the Mets are back talking to the Twins about Santana. Not that he thinks this suddenly means that a deal is likely only that, with the Yanx & Angels supposedly out of the running and the BoSox deal in some sort of holding pattern, Omar is still keeping in touch on the subject in case an opening develops. Reyes is still being ruled out as a chip in any talks.

Edgy DC Dec 05 2007 01:51 PM

Do the Twins want to deal with the Yankees or the Toledo Mud Hens?

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 05 2007 01:56 PM

Question: If the market for Pelfrey and Humber is as stinky as everyone says, why wouldn't the Mets dangle John Maine in front of these teams dying to score yoiung talent? Not that I advocate trading Maine, necessarily, even if I did so brilliantly earlier this offseason in that blockbuster heist, but why the f not? If you want to be making trades he's the kinda guy you hafta be ready to part with. Young, cheap and proven to be pretty good.

Vic Sage Dec 05 2007 02:48 PM

Except that trading Maine just creates another hole in the rotation that will have to be filled by either Pelfrey, Humber, Mulvey, Vargas, etc.. So the upgrade to the rotation would be more limited than getting a front of the rotation guy that pushes everybody back a notch (knocking our "prospects" back to AAA, where they belong)

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 05 2007 02:57 PM

Yes, trading Maine instead of Pelfrey creates a great opportunity for Pelfrey, but if we're not ready to do that, then we can't be surprised when we can't pull the wool over the eyes of trading partners. I mean, Pelfrey's either good or he's not. I guess what I'm saying here is, if we believe Pelfrey's gloing to be worth something in a trade, he oughta be worth something not in a trade. And if young cheap studs such as Haren get offers of a few regulars and a future star, offering up Maine oughta draw some some sweet action too.

Vic Sage Dec 05 2007 03:06 PM

its not quite that black and white. I think Pelfrey does have value, but perhaps not for the 08 Mets. A team thats looking for "futures" might be interested, in conjunction with other prospects, too, and return a proven arm of more use to us this year. Of course, with young arms like Hughes, Bucholz and A.Miller getting bandied about, Pelfrey looks mighty pale.

Edgy DC Dec 05 2007 05:45 PM

Pelfrey will be 24 next year. I'd think if he's worth something in 2010, he's worth something in 2008.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 05 2007 06:14 PM

]Of course, with young arms like Hughes, Bucholz and A.Miller getting bandied about, Pelfrey looks mighty pale. And Maine looks pretty good. Like I said, I'm not looking for excuses to move the guy, but don't see a thing wrong with offering him up if a chance to improve the team should happen to require we trade him.

seawolf17 Dec 05 2007 06:18 PM

Don't need Santana any more. We got [url=http://macsmets.com/mlb/]Kazmir[/url] back.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 05 2007 06:28 PM

Holey shot

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 05 2007 06:29 PM

a fake, FU

Edgy DC Dec 05 2007 06:30 PM

OK, what gives?

SteveJRogers Dec 05 2007 06:41 PM

I think that site either has a "war" with the MOFO or one of their members is a MOFO guy and most likely that person put the spoof up with intentions of posting it on the MOFO. OE: MacMets.com shows nothing, so probably it is more someone spoofing for internet fun. Question is, how did Seawolf find it? OE II: Another tell tale sign of its fakedom, there is no Scott Beck on MLB.com's staff apparently.

Edgy DC Dec 05 2007 07:02 PM

I don't know MLB.com's staff outside of Marty Noble and Bryan Hoch. I thought there not being a press conference at four was a giveaway. Or the MLB.com page on a macmets URL. I'm just sitting here weighing how long to ban seawolf for.

seawolf17 Dec 05 2007 07:15 PM

HEY! Not my page. Found it on another site. It's a good fake, except that the grammar sucks and some of the info is wrong.

DocTee Dec 05 2007 07:22 PM

Motherfather. You had me good.

metirish Dec 05 2007 07:45 PM

I'm so down right now, for about ten seconds I was elated.

Frayed Knot Dec 05 2007 08:40 PM

I don't think I want to know what THAT was all about.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 06 2007 11:45 AM

This crazy stunt interrupted my discussion of the merits of trading John Maine NOW!!!!!

Nymr83 Dec 06 2007 12:27 PM

FUCK YOU whoever made that site.

Willets Point Dec 06 2007 12:47 PM

seawolf17 wrote: Don't need Santana any more. We got [url=http://macsmets.com/mlb/]Kazmir[/url] back. Gulp, I wish!