While perusing the Twins official site yesterday, I come across the following headline: "Mailbag: Santana's future plans." Sounds like it's worth checking out, so I give it a click. Now, keep in mind that the people who write into this mailbag are not the brightest folks (one example of a letter sent in and published in this edition: "What are the odds of Jason Tyner getting a starting position in the outfield next year? He would be a good leadoff hitter, he hit near .300 last season, and plays good defense."), so MLB.com beat writer Kelly Thesier kind of has to work with what she's got. But I was struck by her answer to a query regarding Santana and the possible return on an offseason trade.
The letter refers to a rumor about the Twins trading Santana and Jason Bartlett to the Mets for Jose Reyes, Mike Pelfrey and Carlos Gomez. An interesting thought. Thesier responds that there have been some other musings of what other clubs might offer, "like the Yankees' possibly dangling Melky Cabrera and Ian Kennedy, along with another prospect."
I've never heard this specific rumor before, but if I had I would probably have a lot less hair on my head. Let me get this straight, the Yankees want the best pitcher in the major leagues who is amidst his prime, and in return they are willing to "dangle" their third-best pitching prospect and a guy who projects to be a league-average outfielder? Where do I sign up?!
I really don't know what Santana could garner in a trade this offseason, but I know (at least I pray) that it is more than that. I'm not a believer that some team is going to give up four or five top prospects for one player (I had to roll my eyes yesterday when I heard a suggestion that the Dodgers would give up Matt Kemp, Clayton Kershaw, Andy LaRoche AND Jonathan Meloan for Santana), but with the number of competitive teams out there that are direly in need of an ace, and with the fact that acquiring Santana would also entail exclusive bargaining rights for a full year to work on an extension, there will be a market for him. If the offers were really as underwhelming as the Yankees package suggested by Thesier, I'd probably be more supportive of keeping Santana for another year and taking the draft picks when he leaves as a free agent. What the Twins could get for Santana will really depend on how many teams are serious bidders.
Sportswriters around the nation seem to remain skeptical about the likelihood of a trade actually materializing. The Star Tribune's Joe Christensen said a few weeks that he thought there was a "1-in-5 chance" that the Twins trade Santana, and in a chat on ESPN.com yesterday Buster Olney gave the same odds, opining that there is a 2-in-10 chance the Twins trade their ace.
Nevertheless, Santana's future will be the most interesting offseason storyline in my mind. Let's just hope that future rumors that pop up are a little more enticing that the one referenced by Thesier.
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Twins Territory (http://twins-territory.blogspot.com/) had the same rumor, with Chien-Ming Wang thrown in for good measure. I think Santana will go, it's a matter of for who. And Kelly Thesier does not enjoy the best reputation as a good writer in any case.
I heard the Yankees rumor and it was Wang or Cano to go with Cabrera and Phil Hughes name was brought up as well. I'm with you - Cabrera and Kennedy and a prospect is an underwhelming offer but throw in either Wang or Cano and the offer gets a bit more interesting.
Wang+Kennedy/Hughes+Cano+Cabrera wouldn't be a bad package.
I think it's a bit disingenuous to say that you "heard" the suggestion that the Dodgers would give up Matt Kemp, Clayton Kershaw, Andy LaRoche AND Jonathan Meloan for Santana when you really read it on a really off-the-cuff spill-it-out-of-your-head message board. I also wonder why you wouldn't give props to the message board (or even the maligned poster) you're using for fodder in your blog.
PF, I've linked to BYTO many times in the past. Usually when I do, I try to do it in a more positive light. Do you really think people are going to be encouraged to head over and check out the boards when that type of ridiculous fodder is the only example they've seen from the site?
If it's disingenuous to say you "heard" a rumor when you actually read it, then I guess I'm just disingenuous. Personally, I think that's a bit nit-picky.
Wang+Kennedy/Hughes+Cano+Cabrera wouldn't be a bad package.
The Yankees wouldn't give up Wang and Cano in the same package. I don't really like these hypothetical Yankee trades because they all seem to be centered on pitching (Wang is the centerpiece in a lot of the ones I've seen). That's simply not what the Twins need.
I keep hearing a lot of the same types of trade rumors bouncing around from the Yankees. But for me, the Yankees are the last team I want to see Santana become a part of. I know the teams are a bit limited based on who can afford him, but I honestly would like to see him go just about anywhere (except the AL Central of course) other than New York.
So with that being said, I'd like to see the Twins find someone in the NL to deal Santana to if we don't sign him. As I've said many times before, if we have no intentions of signing him, trade him this winter and preferably someone not in our league.
And on another note, I have to agree, that was a bit nit-picky.
Nick, just to clarify; when I read "heard" I think legitimate rumor from some one in the know, whether it be print fellow bloggers, whatever. Unlike when I read "read/heard on a message board written by an internet poster with no claim to fame" I can place that in context--with the prior, ambiguous "heard," I can't.
Post a Comment