Yanks should say no thanks for Santana
-
- December
- 27
By the time 2008 rolls around, the Johan Santana Rumor Mill will get cranked up again.
The latest bit of speculation is that Minnesota would accept a package of Phil Hughes, Melky Cabrera and Jeff Marquez for their lefty ace. I’m sure that sounds acceptable to many fans.
But, for a second, look at the bigger picture. Are the Yankees developing their kids to play them or trade them?
Santana is terrific, no doubt about it. But adding him to the roster would cost $20 million a season plus a 40-percent luxury tax penalty. The Yankees will be paying for what Santana did in Minnesota.
Santana could be great again. He was 15-13, 3.33 last season despite a lack of run support and only will be 29 in March. But he has thrown 932 innings over the last four seasons, counting the postseason. Sure, he could be terrific. Or he could be the next Mike Hampton. Nobody knows. Name me all the long-term contracts for pitchers that worked out well over the years.
Hughes and Cabrera are symbols of what Brian Cashman is trying to do with the Yankees. The organization did a great job of scouting, drafting and then developing Hughes into the best pitching prospect in the minors.
Cabrera is a guy they rushed to the majors in 2005, screwed up and then built back up into a player good enough to take a job away from Johnny Damon. He would have been cut or traded five years ago.
Trade these guys now and the message is pretty clear: The Yankees are only paying lip service to development. This isn’t trading a few B-level prospects for Bobby Abreu in July. This would be an old-school Yankees move.
It’s their money, not ours. But I sit there at the Stadium and listen. People cheer loudest for the players who came up in pinstripes. People respect A-Rod but they love Jeter. They wanted Clemens do well. They adored Andy Pettitte.
Cashman has somehow made it cool for Yankee fans to care about Jose Tabata even though 99 percent of them have no idea what he looks like.
Spend the money on draft picks, Dominican shortstops and Taiwanese pitchers. Go find kids in Korea, Australia, Venezuela and everywhere else. Hire more scouts and go see every junior college prospect in Texas. Go find the next Santana, don’t trade for the old one.
Let Santana go to the Mets or the Angels or better yet, let him stay in Minnesota where he belongs. If the Red Sox were serious, they would have done the deal weeks ago. They’re pushing chips around the table hoping somebody in Tampa will go all in so they can fold.
We’ve spent two years wondering how good Phil Hughes could be. Let’s find out.
UPDATE, 8:52 a.m.: After seeing all the comments and e-mails, let me clarify something. Santana is a wonderful pitcher. I’m not anti-Santana or against the idea of making trades. I’m with Cashman on this, at some point you have to give these kids you develop a shot. Santana didn’t just arrive one day and win the Cy Young. The Twins developed him over several years.
To me this isn’t a money issue, it’s a philosophy issue. Are the Yankees going to do what they always do and overpay for their starters or develop their own?
This entry was posted
on Thursday, December 27th, 2007 at 12:31 am by Peter Abraham.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Share and Enjoy: 
| 
Print This Post
| 
Email This Post
Wow. That’s all I got to say. You’ve drunk the koolaid and it tastes pretty sweet, huh?
Now, if Santana showed up at the door Nov. 2008, it would be rude to not invite him in.
Amen. As I wrote a few weeks back, this is about what sort of team the Yankees will be, not just about whether they win this year.
Amen is right.
Tell it, Pete!!!
Can’t put it any better than that, Pete. The reason ‘96 was so great is because it was a lot of home-grown guys getting their chance to carry the team. I’ve always said that with the Yankees’ financial resources, they can maybe hit the right combination every once in a while throwing it all at the major league roster. But if they threw a much higher percentage of their funds into development, they can be unbeatable every year. That’s what the Yankees of the 30s and 40s and 50s were — built from within because they had the most cash and the best scouts and they didn’t miss on the Mickey Mantles and Joe DiMaggios and Whitey Fords. I know there’s a draft now, but when you can get Joba in the sandwich round or Ian Kennedy 21st overall or whatever he was for financial reasons, that’s the kind of draft the Yankees can excel with and build through.
You’re going to get a lot of people who want a new toy on the roster every year, Pete. But give me Phil Hughes. He’s a Yankee.
Wow…right on the money Pete,I agree with everything you just said!!!
Exactly.
Well written Pete. Even if it means Santana goes to the Sox I don’t make this deal. I want to see what Hughes can do long term rather than how Santana can manage in his 30’s after a pretty big workload the last few years. We have a chance to really get the youth movement going, let’s not give up now.
There’s also a chance we can pick up up as a free agent if we have to have him. A small chance maybe, but still a chance. No need to deal all the kids, at least I dont think so.
Finally, even though the Yankees would pay millions as well for Santana, a tiny silver lining if he goes to Boston would be the bloating of their payroll and having them tying up 20+ mil in one guy. I think that hurts them a bit more than it would the Yankees.
i love watching the “kids” play. Pete hit it right on the head there people respect a-rod and LOVE jeter for a reason, it’s great to watch them come up and grow into their roles.
Pete is correct. We’ve been waiting to see what the prospects can do. Let’s find out this year. Having Santana on the team would be very nice, but the Yanks will field a very strong team in 2008 without him, and the long-term implications of such a trade are bad. Yankee fans have been pleasantly surprised over the last few years with the emergence of Cano, Wang, Melky and Joba. Let’s give Hughes and Kennedy a chance now.
Bravo. Hopefully they’re listening in Tampa.
farnsworth shooting “deers” - hysterical..
Kudos, Peter.
Peter,
For the first time this year you finally make sense…
jl
If we knew for sure that Santana isn’t going to the Red Sox, then I think it’s fine not to trade for him. But if they do, then we’ll have a team with a $215 million payroll, who will finish in second place in their division, and might not make the playoffs, if the Central Division is as good as it could be.
Melky is good, but not great. There is a Melky-replacement somewhere in the system. His poor on-base percentage should raise a few red flags.
Marquez may or may not be a solid prospect, but he’s not even in the same breath as 8-10 other young Yankee arms. The chances of him ever making the rotation are slim.
And Hughes may or may not be great. But Santana is. I’m not buying into all the talk that he had a bad season, and he’s not a dominant pitcher. He didn’t have a great year, but was still one of the best three pitchers in the league. And he’s left-handed. And he’s still under 30 years old. He will thrive at Yankee Stadium as a lefty.
Sure, it’s great that we develop young players, but Johan Santanas aren’t going to come around very often.
The only reason NOT to make this deal is financial. But it’s not our money. As fans, we just want to see the team win. And I’m sure we’d all agree that we’d feel more comfortable if the Yankee Red Sox rotations were Santana-Wang-Pettitte-Chamberlain-Mussina vs. Beckett-Mastuzaka-Schilling-Buckholz-Wakefield instead of Wang-Pettitte-Hughes-Chamberlain-Mussina vs. Santanta-Beckett-Matsuzaka-Schilling-Buckholz.
Unless Cashman knows for sure that Johan is going to the Mets or Mariners instead of the Red Sox, you have to pull the trigger.
When Phil was on the table before the winter meetings, there was a huge outcry from the fans. The Yankees, more specifically Hank “I’m the Owner” Steinbrenner heard the call to keep Phil. Potential backlash from trading Hughes now on top of paying 140% of his salary may save the Phil.
It would be interesting to see if Kennedy, Tabata, & pitching prospects would get the deal done.
If it doesn’t cost too much in prospects I think the Yankees do it if the Twins are willing.
There’s only one team that’s able to pay Santana what he deserves.
You are 100% correct, sir.
isnt it cashman’s job to acquire the best players?..using the idea that a player has more value just because he’s homegrown is ridiculous…if ya wanna argue the money aspect of the situation, fine…but the fact that hughes and melky are homegrown should have no input in the trade
…imagine if we had santana and the twins were offering up hughes and cabrera, no yankee fan on this planet would do that
people love jeter and pettitte more because they were on all the championship teams than because they are homegrown…same goes for tino and o’neill who werent from our system
there’s a much higher probability that hughes doesnt win 100 games in his MLB career than that he’ll win a cy young…i’m not arguing we should always trade prospects, i’m just supporting the idea that the farm system is used for more than one thing and if its trading your best prospect for the best pitcher in the game, then i’d be willing to do it
great post pete, very eloquent and persuasive.
Check out the link in the website. It calculates the expected standings with the various Johan trades. Not worth it in my opinion.
damn straight.
That’s partially true, but not entirely.
Yankee fans LOVE Melky, Joba, and Hughes as well. None of these guys have won rings.
Nobody gets more cheers these days than Joba and he’s only thrown 20+ IP in the majors.
I understand the sentiment in keeping young prospects. It is fun to see young guys come up though the system and become top notch major leaguers and possible future stars. It was great for Yankees fans to see the likes of Jeter, Petitte, Rivera, Posada and Williams grow and develop from the Yankees system to lead the Yankees to several world titles.
But here is a scenario that many want to ignore. What if the Red Sox pick up Santana and the Sox win a few world titles in the next couple of years and the Yankees may have been able to prevent that by trading a few young players to land Santana. Hughes may develop into a top pitcher in a few years, in a time period in which the likes of Jeter, Posada and ARod probably will be in decline and past the point in which they can be key players on a team gunning for a world title. The Yankees are in a tough spot. The fans and ownership do not want a $200 million team that is set to come up in second place every year and falter in the playoffs. They want to win now, and the Yankees need to act relatively fast while veterans like Jeter, ARod, Petitte, Rivera and Posada are still capable leading a team to a championship. Keeping and developing Hughes is a nice luxury, but Santana gives the Yankees a much better shot at winning a world title while the current Yankees core is still playing in top form.
Pete-
This is your best blog entry in about a year.
Well done.
Happy New Year.
-Ryan
The game of baseball is not played on paper. Yes, Hughes replaced by Santana looks nice on paper and logically one would think it gives the Yanks a better chance of winning a WS. But guess what baseball does NOT work like that. So to say that Santana gives the Yanks a better shot than Hughes is to fall into the trap of looking at the game on paper rather what can/may/actually take place during the 162 game season.
AMEN IT TOOK UP TO 12:31 AM FOR YOU TO SAY IT PETE BUT GOD DAMMIT YOUR 100 % RIGHT !!!!
HALLELUJAH AND KISS MY A** BILL SMITH
Hell NO the Yanks shouldn’t say NO TO SANTANA?! What is wrong with you?! GO … GET … HIM! YESTERDAY! DO IT!
In related NEWS:
The Minneapolis Star Tribune believes that Kei Igawa’s name has come up in some discussions between the Twins and Yankees regarding Johan Santana.
There have been plenty of mixed messages about whether the Twins are interested in taking back any salary in a Santana deal or not. Judging from what they’ve spent to land Mike Lamb and Adam Everett, they seem to be open to picking up $3 million-$5 million players, and Igawa is right in that range if the Yankees are willing to give up on him. Still, the Twins probably wouldn’t look at him as a major part of a deal. There’s been nothing to suggest the teams have talked at all so far this week. LaVelle E. Neal III only says the Twins checked in with the Yankees, Red Sox and Mets before the holiday break.
Source: Minneapolis Star Tribune
Johan Santana had 235K : 52BB last year. LIKE WANG, he had a finger issue which hindrered his ability to throw his slider and he was upset when management tanked the season and dumped Castillo. In his final 19 starts… 4 times he allowed more than 3 runs. All 4 times he allowed 4 runs.
Actually… in 33 starts… He allowed more than 3 runs 10 times… Of those ten starts where he allowed more than 3 runs… 8 times he allowed 4 runs and twice he allowed 6 runs.
SO… in 33 starts… Johan Santana allowed 4 runs or less in 31 of those starts! With the Yanks’ offense, JOHAN could win 25 games.
I LOVE PHIL HUGHES and would hate to see him go… BUT… Yanks have Joba Chamberlain, Ian Kennedy who are MLB ready… Alan Horne and Humberto Sanchez are right behind those guys… They have Andrew Brackman, J-Heredia, Betences, McCutchen and a slew of others who are coming… THEY HAVE PLENTY of talented arms.
I think back to two years ago… I love Cano, but if I could go back and trade Wang-Cano for Josh Beckett… I would do it. WHY? Yanks would be champs right now.
Johan Santana is a risk… sure… SO is Phil Hughes. After all, who got hurt and missed 3 months this year?
Does anybody regret trading Eric Milton for Chuck Knaublauch?
AGAIN… This is Johan Santana we are talking about. He will be the better pitcher the next two years. That’s what counts… Pettitte, Posada, Jeter, Arod, Abreu, Matsui all hope for the best in 2008 and 2009. Let’s worry about 2012 later on! If Johan comes and Yanks win two WS titles… does it matter how good Phil Hughes is?
AFTER ALL… if all the talent in the farm is as good as people claim… we can afford to give up one arm… Chamberlain, Kennedy, Horne and Sanchez can hold the fort while we develop the others!
I like Hughes but Pete is such man of words but theres always a line of BS.Yes Santana has threw over 900 innings in four years.But thats after he was 25.We got three rookies under 25 who if they all here will be forced too throw 200 innings at least twice before 25…can anybody say Kerry Wood or Mark Prior.This isn’t a rebuilding year.
If Santana was in a competitive team last second half year even with a 3 Era he still had other better stats then Beckett and C.C Sabathia and had more stikeouts then last year.
SAntana is in his prime and we need something now so we don’t force Joba and Kennedy to risk their future by trying to force them to be our ace.Because Andy -4 Era- Pettitte and Chien-Ming -overrated stats- Wang can’t be that good.
Pete you should stick with a Patriots blog because short changing Santana and saying he might be Hampton is a joke.He is the best pitcher since Pedro.What a post you had with lots of BS.
I don’t want to trade Hughes. He’s the ’showcase’ piece of our next generation of Yankees. The rebuilding of the farms seemed to begin with him - ‘The Franchise’ DESERVES To Be A Yankee for this next Dynasty.
You can’t make moves based on what Boston could do. You do what is best for the Yankees, period.
My post is pro-Hughes and pro-development, not anti-Santana. He’s great. But no player should lead to you abandoning your philosophy.
Sandman: you rip every post I make, which is fine. But if I’m such a dope why do you so avidly read and post on my blog? Hey, thanks for the traffic.
Trading 1 top prospect out of 3 is “paying lip service to development”?
Breaking news Pete. Not every single one of the players in our farm system are going to make it to the major league team. There isn’t enough room on our 40 man roster for every single AAA, AA, and A+ player. Get used to saying goodbye to one or two if it strengthens a position.
Just like that real valuable 4th round pick you gave away for Randy Moss.
Matt,
Why does it have to be Hughes?
LaVelle E. Neal III is full of crap, has been driving the deal through his blog constantly, it’s terrorist alert bar with him, he’s going to Boston, 100 % it’s done , then oopssorry my bad sources say Boston not happy w/ deal now if I can deal Kennedy and Igawa hell yes do it ! but Hughes, Tabata or Jackson Minny and Bill Smith and whoever else wants to do this deal can go take a flying leap somewhere !!!
Josh, if we traded for Johan Santana, the odds are better that he doesn’t win another 100 games than that he wins another Cy Young award. The odds work that way on all pitchers at all stages of their careers.
But for the Yankees, homegrown players do have a lot of value. I’ve never seen a player come up through the Yankee system, be unable to handle New York, then succeed somewhere else. But for players that started their careers elsewhere, it’s been total hit or miss as to whether or not they can handle New York. Look at Randy Johnson - he couldn’t even handle the media while walking to his physical before offically joining the team. Yet look at his amazing job under pressure in the World Series while in Arizona. And let’s not forget our buddy Pavano, who decided Tommy John surgery was more fun than pitching in New York.
I have never read that, and Googling turned up nothing. Can you post a link?
How can you compare Johan Santana to a 41 year old Randy Johnson?
When was the last time the Yankees had a legitimate number 1 starter? Whats been killing the Yankees in the post season?
Pete-
Well I don’t like to rip your post because you do report good stuff but again you are short changing the best pitcher right now and the past 4 season.Would you rip on Pedro because he wasn’t good against the Yankees.
I want young talent but we got enough were we can give up yes a great Prospect but we don’t know how good he can be.And what a 4th outfielder in Melky, a future 7th inning relief guy in Marquez.
Even if Hughes becomes great Santana isn’t gonna bomb.If Wang can win 19 games with 199 hits in 199 innings and 104 strikouts the Yankees can win alot of Santana problems.And a team will give Santana 8 years and the Yankees won’t do that.
If we keep Hughes I’m happy but I fear we can hurt our young guys in the rotation by forcing them to be the aces of our staff.
Ed-
The whole Yankees pressure is a myth.Randy Johnson wasn’t perfect because he was 41 and had back surgery the next year.If we had him when he was 29 we would have had 6 championships in the 90’s.Pavano was a man like Kevin Brown made of glass.Wright failed his first physical.
Jeff Weaver,Conteres were not good anywhere for more then a year.They didn’t have talent.
All great busts in New York came with old age,no talent,overrated stats,or injury guys.No pressure problems thats why I don’t give our players that.
Save Phil Hughes.
I agree about not dealing Hughes.
However, would there be a deal for both sides along the lines of Tabata, Horne, Betances, & Gonzalez?
This is from the Minny paper… 8-20-2007:
http://www.startribune.com/sports/twins/11700336.html
Blister not a concern
Johan Santana’s slider was the pitch that gave him the most trouble when he was dealing with a cracked fingernail and blister problem in recent weeks.
Only four of Santana’s 112 pitches were sliders in Sunday’s 1-0 victory over Texas, but he said the finger wasn’t the reason. He said he also threw very few sliders when striking out 13 Rangers in a 7-1 victory May 22.
“I wasn’t really thinking about my finger or my slider,” Santana said. “I was just trying to get people out.”
Though Santana’s finger is mostly healed, Gardenhire did cite it as one reason not to push him past the eighth inning.
“We were going to give him the decision,” Gardenhire said. “With him tipping his hat and everything, 110-plus pitches, coming off a blister, broken fingernail and all those things, we were going to give him a decision, but you know, what? He did his job. He did everything he was supposed to do.”
————
I just found this in the notes section doing a quick search… I just remember hearing about it at the time… How it was impacting how and if he threw his slider. LIKE WANG, he ahd a cracked finger/Blister issue… THUS, was reduced to throwing two pitches… I’m sure this wasn’t the entire problem but I do suspect it had some impact on his pitching…
On top of this… Santana was vocal and upset when the Twins dealt Luis Castillo… I bet his heart wasn’t 100 percent into last year… I’m not saying he quit on his team… nothing like that… BUT… along with his inability to effectively throw his slider… I’m sure this was the reason why he pitched only like an All-Star, and not an immortal.
PETE…
I do think it’s HARD to deal Phil Hughes… He was 4-0 in SEP/OCT, when it mattered most. Was great down the stretch, in a pennant race, in NYC atmosphere, at sucha young age. He was getting outs pitching at 75 percent and then, when his legs returned and that FB found its late life again… He was an ace.
Youngest Yankee EVER to wina post season game, had MLB’s second lowest era the final 4 weeks… All that Jazz!
Had he started Game One… Yanks win the series…
What’s there not to like! hughes actually blows away Johan’s numbers… Compare Santana’s rookie year to Phil’s!
Santana was good, not great, then he was “forced” to learn a third pitch… his changeup… and the rest is history.
Same thing with Phil Hughes… as soon as he masters the Change… Cy Youngs are coming. He learned his curve in a few weeks, and developed it into one of milb best. I suspect he will learn from Edwar how to toss that change.
WITH ALL THAT SAID… NYY should do the deal… I have faith that Kennedy-Horne-Sanchez are good and if our system keeps producing… then this is a no-brainer. Santana-Pettitte-Wang is a nasty 1-2-3 punch. With our offense!
Suffice to say… I’ll be happy either way. Yanks should just keep calling MInny’s bluff… let MInny keep Santana… Go into next season… keep Hughes and then just make a run at Johan after 2008… Have him start opening day 2009, in the new stadium!
TOTALLY agreed Pete, totally agreed.
Can’t agree with this.
You know who had a great young core at one time? The Los Angeles Clippers.
They had Elton Brand, Lamar Odom, Michael Olowakandi, Darius Miles, and Quentin Richardson all around the same age. You want to know how many of those guys ended us as true stars and are still on the Clippers today? 1 in Elton Brand. You want to know how many that were huge flops? 2 in Olowakandi and Darius Miles. You want to know how many became role players and left to get inflated contracts elsewhere? 2 in Odom and Q-Rich.
How does this pertain to the Yankees?
The fact is that while it’s great to fantasize about how we could have three great aces in our rotation for years to come, the fact is that likely only 1 out of this group will fulfill their potential and become one. Injuries or just a lack of special ability will likely derail 2 of the other 3 from ever reaching stardom in some way or another. It is stupid to have a pitching rotation core that is the same age because it rarely works out. We are talking about a bonafide ace right now. We like to talk about homegrown talent, but the Yankees’ teams of the 90’s thrived with acquisitions like Clemens, David Cone, David Wells, Chuck Knoblouch, Tino, David Justice, etc. The Yankees took a risk on an injury prone pitcher with great stuff in the first round in the 20’s and it paid off, they can TRADE him for the best pitcher in baseball. I don’t see a better 1-2-3 punch in all of baseball then Santana, Wang, and Pettitte.
“Santana could be great again. But he was 15-13, 3.33 last season and will be 29 in March.”
It sounds like you think Santana was not great last year. You can’t seriously be judging him by W-L record. Do you realize how horrible his run support was last season? The Twins scored 3 runs or less in 18 of his 33 starts. For comparison’s sake, the Yankees scored 3 euns or less in 4 of Wang’s 30 starts. Wang had 2 full runs of higher run support on average per start over Santana. That is a huge difference. Yet Santana still had 15 wins. Think about how many wins Santana would have had with the yankee offense behind him. He most likely would have won the Cy Young award. Beckett had the same run support that Wang had - 2 full runs more per start than Santana. And the Red Sox scored 3 runs or less in 6 of Beckett’s 30 starts. Santana was put in those unfavorable situations 18 times out of 30+ starts. Think about that. You can try to defend the Win stat all you want, but you cannot deny that run support was a huge factor there. And there’s no other possible way you can try to suggest that Santana wasn’t great last season. Beckett’s WHIP (in a career year) was 1.14. Santaan’s WHIP in a “down” year was 1.07. Santaan has had WHIP’s under 1.00 in 3 of the last 3 seasons. He was great last season. Beckett’s ERA was 3.27, Santaan’s was 3.33. That is a difference of about one earned run. Which means there is essentially no significant difference. Santana’s gap in WHIP and K/9 were far far greater than that. Santana was terrible at giving up homers last year. That is the stat you should look at if you want bring up red flags regarding Santana. Not his W-L record and ERA. I’ll paste it again:
“Santana could be great again. But he was 15-13, 3.33 last season”
I mean come on, don’t you see now how foolish that sounds? Santana has been great every season for the last 5 seasons. Which leads to the next foolish statement…
“He also has thrown 932 innings the last four seasons, counting the postseason. Sure, he could be terrific. Or he could be the next Mike Hampton. Nobody knows.”
Wow. This might be dumber than the previous statement. Are you seriously comparing Johan Santana to Mike Hampton? Santana is the best pitcher in baseball over the last 5 seasons and is in the beginning of his prime. You say he is 29 years old like it is a bad thing. The fact that he is 29 is the good news. This is not 40 year old Randy Johnson coming to save the day. This is a guy the Yankees will pay not only for what he has done in the past but also for the dominance they expect in the future. Mariano is a guy they are paying for what he has done in the past. Ditto for Jorge. In fact that is the case with most players who are signed in their mid to late 30’s. But that’s not the case with Johan. It goes both ways with Santana. He deserves to be well paid for what he has done in the past, but they expect huge things out of him in the future FOR A LONG TIME. This is not some short-term move that the old-style Yankees would make. The Yankees aren’t trading the farm for a one or two year fix. Santana is expected to be dominant for at least the next 5 years. That’s a long time, in case you don’t know.
The 932 IP for Santana is not a bad thing. Brandon Webb has thrown 921 IP over the last 4 seasons and is 28 years old. Yeah sure that must mean his arm is going to fall off any day now. When you look at guys that have thrown the most innings over the last 3 or 4 seasons, you generally see the elite pitchers in baseball that have stayed healthy like Santana, Webb, Peavy, Oswalt, etc.
Santana has been remarkably healthy. And having guys that throw 200+ IP per year saves the bullpen immensely. In case you haven’t noticed, the Yankee bullpen is a mess. Do you realize how helpful it is to have a guy like Santana that can throw 230 IP a year, in terms of saving the bullpen from overload? Hughes is going to throw 180 max this year, and probably less. Of course it would be foolish to trade Hughes based solely on the fact that he won’t throw 200 IP this year, but my point is that the fact that Santana has thrown 900+ IP over the lst 4 seasons is a GOOD THING. When he is healthy he is a innings eater and saves the bullpen, in addition to providing 200+ insanely dominant innings. The Yankees only had one pitcher that broke 200 IP last year. And there’s no way Joba/Hughes/Kennedy are doing that in 2008. Mussina likely won’t get there either. Santana’s presence will help the bullpen tremendously every year. And he has been healthy every year. In fact who has the more recent injury history, Santana or Hughes? So maybe Hughes could be the next Mike Hampton instead? Any pitcher can get a freak injury. That is the danger with signing a pitcher to a long-term contract. But saying that “nobody knows”, as if that random chance is reason enough to stay away from Santana, is flat-out absurd. Your point should have been this: signing pitchers to contracts of more than 4 years has generally not worked out in most cases. There is no need to imply that Santana is going to get injured because he has thrown 900+ innings. The Baseball Prospectus guys have shown that pitcher injuries are not correlated closely with IP. Instead, injuries are highly correlated with how often a pitcher exceeds a benchmark pitch count, like for example 110 pitches. The point is that total IP are misleading when considering how much wear and tear a pitcher has accumulated. Wang threw 199 IP last year, and Pettitte threw 215 IP last year. That’s only a difference of 16 innings, yet Andy Pettitte threw 534 more pitches than Wang did. So this goes back to my main gripe here: the fact that Santana has thrown 900+ IP over the last 4 seasons is a good thing. It shows that he is one of the healthiest and most effective pitchers in baseball. If you want to get worried abour injury possibilities you should analyze pitch counts. Mark Prior and Kerry Wood were ruined because Dusty Baker didn’t know how to manage a pitch count. The Twins always kept Santana at a reasonable number of pitches. This goes a lot deeper than “oh Hampton got injured so any pitcher that sings a long-term deal has a decent chance of getting injured too.”
I don’t know if I am in favor of the proposed trade or not. I like Hughes and would love to see the Yankees win some titles with him and Joba and Cano, etc. However, Johan Santana is heads and shoulders above every pitcher in baseball and he is the one guy that is so darn good that you actually do have to consider trading the untouchable Hughes for. It’s a tough call for me. SJ44 has already argued many times that the trade is a no-brainer for the Yankees to make. Lots of other people feel that way as well. I’m kind of undecided at this point. But why you think Santana’s age and IP over the last 4 seasons are warning signs is beyond me. And the fact that you think he was not great in 2007 is also hard to believe. He’s the best pitcher in baseball and is as reliable and consistent as they come.
Sorry for the poor typing.
I meant that Santana’s WHIP was under 1.00 in 3 of the last 4 seasons.
And I don’t know why I spelled Johan’s last name incorrectly so many times.
I guess I need to take a typing class!
“But adding him to the roster would cost $20 million a season plus a 40-percent luxury tax penalty.”
The money factor is mostly irrelevant for the Yankees. This would be a good argument for not trading for Santana for just about any other team in baseball. But the Steinbrenners are willing to spend the money to put a better team on the field. The tax threshhold is raised to 155 million next season. Then the Yankees will be losing a lot of payroll in the next offseason with Giambi, Farnsworth, Mussina, Pavano, Abreu, and Pettitte’s contracts ending. At least those first 4 guys will be gone, and that’s close to 50 million right there. If one of Abreu/pettitte also are not re-signed that will be another 16 million cleared up. There are a lot of good free agent pitchers next offseason (especially compared to this offseasons garbage offerings) and if the Yankees don’t spend 20 million per year on Santana right now, they will likely sign some other starter next offseason for like 15 million per year, like Sabathia.
But basically my point is, the Yankees are the one team where your point about Santana’s financial cost does not matter much at all.
“Trade these guys now and the message is pretty clear: The Yankees are only paying lip service to development. This isn’t trading a few B-level prospects for Bobby Abreu in July. This would be an old-school Yankees move.”
This is also incorrect. The Yankees have shown that they are very serious about having a strong farm system. Just look at the Yankee signings this offseason - none of them were Type A free agents from other teams. This means that the Yankees did not lose any future draft picks. If this was the old-style Yankees, Rowand would probably be wearing pinstripes right now and Melky already would have been traded for Gagne back in July. This is not the old-style Yankees. What this is, is a chance for the Yankees to acquire a rare talent and the best starting pitcher in baseball.
Having a strong farm system is good for multiple reasons. If you actually expect every high draft pick and top prospect to stay with the organization for the next 10 years then you are nuts. Ideally many of them do in fact show enough ability to become productive mainstays on the MLB roster down the line. But having a deep farm system also provides you with more trade possiblities. The Yankees can afford to lose Hughes/Melky/Marquez for Santana because the farm system is so strong. Losing Melky would actually be the bigger blow in 2008 since he is so good defensively and there is no obvious replacement in 2008 for that aspect of his game. Losing Hughes is obviously a bigger long-term loss than losing Melky, but that’s ok because Santana will likely be much better than Hughes over the next 5 years, and by then the Yankees will probably have more prospects like Hughes/Joba in the minors. This is because the Yankees are drafting very intelligently in recent years and using their financial resources to sign high-ceiling players that other teams will stay away from. They are also very active in the international market and have an advantage there over most teams. There will be more guys like Hughes in Yankee minor league system. So losing him for Santana is not in any way a sign that these are the old-style Yankees. Don’t let this one move overshadow what’s been obvious over the last couple of years: The Yankees are serious about drafting and player development, and this makes them more self-sufficient as well as a more flexible trade partner, as well as less dependent on mediocre free agents that cost them high draft picks like the Farnsworths of the world.
What we need is a little luck. All that needs to happen for our best interest is for Santana to stay a Twin for 2008. With around 85 mill coming off in 2009 and around another 25 mill saved in 2010, we can surely get Santana in 2008 and not give up Hughes, maybe go for a proven 1st baseman in their prime and . Looks to me like the miracle years are making a comeback very very soon, by 2020 we should have 32 rings at least…HOPEFULLY
Easy solution here: trade Wang instead of Hughes… If Minny didn’t like Wang that much, add one or two more B-level prospects in the package! even some cash(for Wang’s arbitration) included…
We save Hughes, and get Santana for 6 years or so. Wang is one-trick phony! 19-win is overrated, but it might make him valuable as a trade bait.
Hughes is cheap. Wang will be getting good money in the next couple of months from arbitration, probably 5 to 7 million.
The Twins are cheap. They won’t go for that.
god i love you and your firggin face.
MAKE PHIL HUGHES
MAKE JOBA CHAMBERLAIN
build a team of people. they aren’t REAL but they are still homeslice YANKEEZ.
I’d ratha looze with my peepz than fail with negative four billions thousand dollerz.
at this point does it even sting when the sox win the world series.??? not more than herpes!!!!!!!!!!!?!! and we’ve all got that. kevin brown gave it. then he shot us.
Amen, Peter.
I especially like the part “Spend money on…Taiwanese pitchers”
Don’t make the friggin’ deal, Hank!!
sorry, pete. agree to disagree. hughes, cabrera and marquez? you do that deal.
hope you had a great christmas, pete. enjoy the pats game saturday and your new year.
It is more fun to support the kids any day. There’s even a keep Hughes blog now.
This is perfect. Exactly everything I’ve been thinking. As touted as they are, people don’t realize just how enormous the potential of Hughes/Chamberlain is. They’ve both got nasty stuff and are both good bets to win 20+ down the road. A dynasty built around likable, non-steroid home-grown pitchers with ace stuff would make being a Yankees fan something to be proud of again. Forget Lester and Bucholz. This is a different type of pitcher, and the Yankees should hold on to both of them (Kennedy can come too).
If the deal is Melky, Phranchise and Marquez for Santana, then that deal has to be made. I appreciate your feelings of the “new Yankee philosophy” about retaining the kids,
but dealing 3 of them for the best lefthander in baseball is a no-brainer.
We still have tons of talented kids in the system and making this trade doesn’t affect them or signal and exodus of minor league talent.
It’s one trade and you HAVE to make it. The true Yankee philosophy is to win the world series. If it means parting with unknown prospects (with unproven pedigree)to win the world series, you do it.
Santana on the Yankees is our best bet for multiple playoff success.
Totally agree. Lets win with what we’ve got.
Peter,
You have captured the essence of being a fan.
It is not only about winning.
When all is said and done, developing and using your own talent is the right course - - most of the time. With any trade, you do what you can to improve your team. If your team is owned by a “win-now” guy, however, it’s tough to be 100% pro-development because development takes time and patience.
I must admit that I was surprised to see the calculations in the website linked in plank’s screen name (above, 1:33 AM). I thought acquiring Johan would contribute more wins than that.
[And for anyone following last night’s bloody blogodrama about McNamee, Clemens and Mitchell, I was kidding about my specialty being house closings].
McNamee’s lawyer is really spinning. Poor Brian. All Brian wants is a normal life with his family. From today’s NYT.
[McNamee has declined all interview requests. “He’s hoping for a normal life with his family,” Ward said. “He wishes that it all had never happened. His life has been in such a state of disarray right now.”
Ward said that during the time McNamee injected Clemens with the banned substances, he did not tell anyone about it. Contemporaneous statements to others can be used in legal settings to corroborate circumstantial evidence. On the other hand, a pattern of dishonesty can be used in the same settings to discredit an allegation.
The most damaging incidents in McNamee’s background, Ward said, were instances of lying to journalists for years to protect Clemens and a 2001 case in Florida in which McNamee was accused but not charged with sexual battery and with giving a date-rape drug to a woman. That investigation was closed because of what a Florida prosecutor called “insufficient physical and corroborative evidence.”]
What’s wrong with house closings? I mean you must be so… busy these days.
Regarding Clemens, no matter what he does, his reputation has been soiled and it will be really hard to change the minds of the people, since most people had thought it before he was put in the Mitchell report and most people either love or hate the Yankees. I wonder what I guy like Moose thinks right now, I mean he’s won 220 some odd games and it appears to be legit, maybe he would be a sure fire hall of famer if he used PEDs.
Regarding Congress and the whole steroid thing, I wish they would worry more about my health insurance and oil/gas prices. Also, when will the steroid question come up in the next Hillary Obamma or Rudy McCain debate? Doesn’t the masses want to know where they stand on the issue???
Lastly, I have mixed feelings regarding Santana, on one side I would love to have him, but I have been following Hughes for at least three years now and really believe he is going to be a stud. I’ve said it before at the age of 19 in the AA post season against Portland he had something like 13K in 7 innings. That says something to me, as well as what I saw down the stretch and against Cleveland. In a perfect world he stays in Minny and opens the new Stadium in 2009.
Pete thanks for the posts during your vacation, Have a Happy New Year. Something-like 58 days until pitchers and catchers report.
Let me begin by saying that while Johan has thrown alot of inning the major problems are: he is a small pitcher and they do not stand up in the long run, he did not throw his slider late in the year a pitch that is hard on the arm this means that he either had a tender arm or shoulder or worst a tender elbow.
I have been a Yankee fan since 1964 when I was in fourth grade. I was happy to see the Yankees keep Phil Hughes. All of the ccouts say that he is a furture number one starter and in fact pitched the second half of the season on one leg. He did not regain his fast ball of 95 plus, sharp curve ball and change up until the playoffs. Many people like to point out that at one time the Mets had three young starters and they did not make it. They forget that each of the three had problems. Wilson had the best stuff but even before he was drafted had shoulder problems. Puls could not repeat his motion and had touble with his secondary pitches. Izzy also had trouble with his secondary stuff and in fact many scouts thought he would be better off in the pen. Where he is now.
The Yankee big three all have easy motions and can repeat it. They all have 3 average to above pitches. As you know a team considers itself lucky to find one but the Yankees have two top ones in Hughes and Chamberlain and with Kennedy not far behind. I almost forgot Horne who Bob Montgomery called the best pitcher he had seen in the minors until he saw Chamberlain. Given time these pitchers might turn in to the Braves old staff and be together for 10 years.
With most of you being Yankee fans would it be nice to see this?
Yes, Pete, by all means, let’s keep Phil Hughes. I don’t think your analysis of Santana is valid, though, especially if you’re using, of all things, his won-loss record from last year, as proof. He’s got plenty in the tank. You just, as Mista Cashman says, don’t pay twice for the same guy, and you don’t pay for ANYTHING with Phil Hughes.
“If the Red Sox were serious, they would have done the deal weeks ago. They’re pushing chips around the table hoping somebody in Tampa will go all in so they can fold.”
This is best, and truest, part of Pete’s statement.
Millions for rookies, but not one player for Santana.
The late great Branch Rickey taught us that.
http://riveraveblues.com/feed/
But in the course of his argument, Abraham strays a bit from his analysis. He writes: “Santana could be great again. But he was 15-13, 3.33 last season and will be 29 in March.”
Now, as far as my reading of this statement goes, Abraham’s use of the “but” indicates that Johan Santana was not great in 2007 because he won only two more games than he lost. It’s a classic sportswriters mistake. Johan Santana didn’t win more games because the Twins’ offense was terrible. They were 25th in runs scored and 27th in team OPS.
Despite this poor offensive production, Johan Santana still managed to win 15 games. But that’s neither here nor there. Let’s look at some of the other stats the once-great Johan Santana put up. His 3.33 ERA was 7th overall in the American League, trailing John Lackey by 0.31 runs. His 1.07 WHIP was tops in the AL, and his 235 strike outs trailed Scott Kazmir by just four. His strike out-to-walk ratio was 4.52, good for fourth in the American League.
In a word, Johan Santana in 2007 was great.
Spot on Pete. As wonderful as he has been we should just say no to Johan. A dominant five man home grown rotation; with the resources the Yankees possess it can and should be be done. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.
The integrity of the farm system! The symbolism about the old vs. new Yankees.
It’s nice, but the goal of the Yankees is to win World Series; it’s not about keeping the integrity of your symbols as your watch the BoSox walk away with them.
I think the Yanks ought to go with Santana and keep developing prospects. There’s no “once-in-a-lifetime” Santana or Pujols in the system, so let’s make a deal.
You guys who fret over Santana going to Boston are not looking at the big picture…Even if we get Santana and mortgage our future for him we do NOT pass Boston now and we will definately not pass them in the future…Boston is built for now and the future with Bucholz, Ellsbury, Pedrioa,Lester,Papelbon and some new guys waiting in their farm system like Lowrie amd Masterson…Let Boston mortgage their future and we will blow by them in two years with our kids leading the way. Trade the kids away and we are looking up at Boston for the next 10 years not the next 2…
Also, there is safety in numbers… Lets say you “prospect pessimists” are right and only one of the “big three” pans out…What if the one that pans out, is the one we traded away? I don’t believe this is the scenario that will play-out and IMO all three are legit Major Leaguers right now, But, what if?
I am not against the idea of going into 2008 with the 3 young pitchers. But, if acquiring the best pitcher in the game really only costs Phil Hughes, to me it’s still a no-brainer.
I think part of any team’s philosophy should be to maintain the strength of the farm system, with the goal of developing your MLB team from within. But, part of the reason your farm system is there is to develop MLB players, or use talent from the minor leagues to acquire what you think might be the last piece to a championship puzzle. To me, that is what Johan is.
and because Cashman has put such an emphasis on drafting and developing young pitching, the Yankees have the unique opportunity of trading one ‘Grade A’ pitching prospect, but still going into the season with two or three other pitching prospects who would be ranked top 5 in any other organization.
the money means nothing to me, honestly. the Steinbrenners have shown they are willing to spend, and who am I, or really any fan for that matter, to sit here and count pennies for them. you took the hit on the luxury tax for Clemens last year, and you knew what you were getting was much less than a #1-2 SP on an AL staff guy… so why whine about the luxury tax burden when what you are getting back is undoubtedly a #1-2 type pitcher?
and I like Melky, and he’s a nice player, but to me, he’s a defense first guy. Players like him are a dime a dozen around the league.
and you dont make this move to get Aaron Harang or John Smoltz, or some other above average pitcher with no track record in the AL.
but you do make the move when it could mean a World Championship for 2008, and beyond… when the player you are getting back for your stud prospect is himself still in the prime of his career, and will be for the next 5 years.
again, i like Hughes and I like Melky, and if we go into the season with them, I’ll root just the same and i wont berate Cashman for not making the move… but i dont think anyone can fault Cashman or the organization for rolling the dice on a player who is top 5 in the league right now.
the problem with anyone thinking they know what the present administration of the red sox is going to do is that they have a track record for acting in surprising ways.
-they traded an icon garciaparra in the middle of the season
- they traded top rated prospect in hanley ramirez who would have anchored their infield for years to come
-they spent over 100 million dollars for matsuzaka when everyone thought the yankees were the leaders in getting him
the yankees should always expect the unexpected with the red sox.
and i could care less about what the Saux do. they want to get him? fine, we’ll just take our chances with what we’ve got agaist what they’ve got.
i’m not one to sit here and say the yankees need to get him so the red saux dont. but i am for improving our team, and noone can argue that acquiring Johan doesnt make this team better.
What’s the saying?? “All prospects are suspects.”
Santana is a proven commodity. If the Twins take that deal, you have to make it. The Yankees have enough depth in their system to recoop. I love Phil Hughes but if the opportunity came along to get a proven pitcher - a true ace - you get it done.
The Yanks already committed to spending a fortune this winter, with ARod, Posada and Rivera (who still doesn’t think he got enough). Let Santana stay in Minnesota, or Boston can break the bank for him- which they won’t, either.
The Yankees have lots of possible choices and the whole month of March to sort out a starting rotation and bullpen. Stay the course, Cashman.
I’m with you, Peter. Let’s see how good Hughes is this year. With a year that included a post season win already under his belt, he could put together a great season on 2008.
murphydog-
i’m trying to save some money on a house closing. can you help me out?
last night was a fascinating legal discussion on the holes in mcnamee’s statements in the mitchell report. it was good to see several attorneys on the blog voicing similar concerns i had with the report, but with an obviously much better understanding of the way the legal system works.
it would be interesting to see some attorneys from the dark side give their view of the mitchell report. if the mitchell report is really a flawed legal report, the report itself will be on trial in the court of public opinion. mitchell’s reputation would be at stake.
if somehow clemens comes out of the 60 minute interview in good shape, i’m expecting a counter punch from mlb and maybe mitchell himself. i don’t think mitchell or mlb thought clemens would react as strongly as he is.
mitchell himself hinted that all that was dug up should be left in the past. it was as he was saying to the players to just take it and it will blow over.
clemens isn’t playing that game, which is going to force mlb to defend itself.
i think this is really a situation where the nail that sticks up gets pounded down. the big question is who the nail is and who the hammer is here.
this may become a test of player strength vs ownership strength.
Total agreement with you here. The Sox are clearly bluffing and once Giambi, Pavano, & Abreu are off the books next year and Johan becomes a free agent, we can invite him to come play with us for $20 mil a year and he can pitch along side Hughes and Kennedy and Joba without the 40% luxury tax burden. Something about a homegrown Yankee gives me butterflies in my stomach and makes winning feel so much better. Our kids will be great!
I sure hope that someone in the yankees front office read your post pete.
SAVE PHIL HUGHES!
Symbols don’t get wins, plus the Yankees system has a deep enough farm system that it wouldn’t hurt too bad. Having said that, I am on the fence. IMO, there is no chance Santana will be anything like mike Hampton.
Boston’s farm system is overrated from what Gammons would lead some to believe and make no mistake about it, playing games about wanting Santana is exactly what they’re doing. Their game is to see the Yankee farm system erode and return to what it was before Cashman’s plea to return to building from within as a primary talent source.
In reality, Boston is getting tired of playing financial hardball with the Yankees and would far prefer not to carry a Santana contract for the sake of what future they presently have in Ellsbury, Lester and Buchholz. Schilling, Wakefield, Timlin, and even Manny Ramirez are nearing the end of the line with no viable prospects showing enough to replace them. This makes a Santana contract even more weighty.
The old adage of never having enough pitching still applies and the Yankees have that edge in upcoming pitching talent.
Anybody realizes all that talent will eventually develop according to plan but there’s strength in numbers and some of it can be used in trading chips. Put the Santana deal on the back burner.
I would make the deal because nowadays highly regarded pitching prospects seldom pan out. Remember how 5 years ago people were going ga-ga over Mark Prior and how the Yankees messed up by not signing him in 1998? His signing yesterday for a one year deal could be Hughes in 2013..a brief note in the 20-20 update. But if Cashman et al want to kep the Young Arms I won’t protest too much. Abraham is right about loving your own kids more than imports. But there are exceptions such as Ruth and Jackson (and Reggie was hated most of his time).
Keep the kids..sign Santana in 2008 when useless salaries
like Pavano, Giamonjuicebi, Mussina come off the books. I’m sure someone can discreetly send a message to Santana’s agent like Torre did to the Dodgers.
“Boston is built for now and the future with Bucholz, Ellsbury, Pedrioa,Lester,Papelbon and some new guys waiting in their farm system like Lowrie amd Masterson…”
what are they going to be- a great pitching staff and the seven dwarfs? if pedroia and ellsbury are all they can come up with on offense that isn’t going to scare anyone.
at some point the red sox are going to have to add some thunder to their lineup. the power in it is getting older, not younger. getting santana would severely limit their financial ability to add some power to the lineup.
no matter what happens with santana and the red sox , they will have some problems . varitek, manny, drew, lugo ,lowell, and even ortiz probably have their best offensive years behind them.
I dont see this as simply either you develop players or you pay for your players.
would the yankees be paying/buying a player? yes.
are the yankees giving up talent to get this player? yes.
do the yankees still have two other young pitchers developed from the system to step in and play a vital role on the 2008 team? yes.
does trading Phil Hughes mean you’ve changed philosophy, and are willing to sell off the entire system you’ve taken 2-3 years to redevelop? not by any means.
can you simultaneously develop pitching while also acquiring a more proven commodity? of course, and thats what this move would be accomplishing.
I agree with you completely, Pete!
Your opinion Pete seems to say “we should never trade any of our homegrown prospects.” Losing Phil to gain Johan, while we have at least three other great youngsters either starting or going to start in 2008, is not that painful. And yes, Melky is a fan favorite and has done well taking Damon’s job away. But he’s not the second coming of the Mick.
If Phil + Melky + Marquez get it done, I think it’s a good move. And as far as money is concerned, I’m in the “It’s the Yankees, they’re gonna spend one way or the other” camp.
I’d rather have a dynasty a few years from now than to fail miserably in the 1st round of next season’s play-offs. Keep Hughes, Cabrera, and Marquez!
I dont understand why people think that you cant have a dynasty with Johan at the front of your rotation 3 or 4 years from now. Thats why you can afford to trade a pitching prospect of Hughes’s caliber; because Johan is still so young, you can assume that he’ll remain effective through his tenure here in NY.
this isnt trading for Randy Johnson, knowing you’ve got only 1 or 2 years of him, and then your window is closed.
“because Johan is still so young, you can assume that he’ll remain effective through his tenure here in NY. ”
considering he wants a 7 year contract, you can’t assume that at all.
TomoPogo basically said it all.
I can’t believe someone who gets paid to write about baseball could say this about Johan Santana: “Sure, he could be terrific. Or he could be the next Mike Hampton. Nobody knows.”
I’ll keep reading this site because it covers breaking Yankee news, but this “analysis” is just laughable.
“does trading Phil Hughes mean you’ve changed philosophy, and are willing to sell off the entire system you’ve taken 2-3 years to redevelop? not by any means.”
for the record, i agree with you here.
i don’t want to trade Hughes, but i don’t think it’s a philosophical change to trade him for Santana.
and hmmm, while i agree that for 7 years, no pitcher is ever the same in year 7 that he is in year 1… thats just the way it is, not with pitchers but any player you sign long term.
but do you take Johan for 7 years, knowing he could be at the top of your rotation for the next 4? i would, because while you have him to front the rotation now, you take the next 4 years to develop the next Phil Hughes or Joba Chamberlain, who can take the reigns as the #1 in years 5-6-7 of the Johan deal.
Since you were the guy who guaranteed us that Don Mattingly would be the next Yankee manager and that aliens would land in Central Park before A-Rod resigned, I don’t take your pronouncements on what the Red Sox will or won’t do very seriously. Why don’t you just admit you’re blowing smoke and don’t really have any clue who might or might not trade for Santana?
As far as Hughes goes, we HAVE seen enough to know what he can do. He’s a guy with a 90 MPH fastball and no out pitch. From what I saw last year, he doesn’t look any different from Wade Taylor, Ryan Bradley, Ed Yarnall, or half a dozen other overhyped Yankee pitching prospects of the last 20 years. If the Twins are dumb enough to take him, a fourth outfielder, and some scrub from the minors for a left-handed ace in his prime, then I say let’s make a deal.
It’s interesting to me how people can say, without a doubt, that Boston is the unquestioned front-runner for years to come. If I’ve learned anything in the last several years, it’s to not count the chickens before they hatch. The Yankees (our team) has won the division every year since 2000, save last season, correct? And in that time, they’ve appeared in the World Series 3 times, winning only once. Every year, at the start of spring training, they have been tagged not only to win their division by many “experts,” but to win well over 100 games. In the last 3 seasons, which seasons did not go past the first round of playoffs, the Yankees did not win their 100 games, and last year did not win the division, but at least made the Wild Card. And even with that, the Wild Card winner was “a lock” to come out of the Central Division. In the last 3 seasons, the Yankees have suffered and overcome all manner of injury - in 2005, their pitching staff was decimated and only the “lightning in a bottle” pitching of Aaron Small and Shawn Chacon, and the surprising ability of Wang and Cano saved their season; in 2006, they had to overcome the loss of Sheffield and Matsui to their regular lineup, and Melky Cabrera rose to the occasion; we all know how 2007 started out.
All that to say, you just don’t know how things are going to turn out. To say that if Boston gets Santana they are “a lock” for the next however many years is just foolishness. Which is not to say it couldn’t happen. But there’s no more certainty for them than there is for the Yankees if they get Santana. Santana is one player. The truth of the matter is that if everything goes according to plan for ANY TEAM, then they stand a great chance of winning. But in baseball, anything can and usually does happen.
I am firmly on the fence about Santana. He is a proven star in the American League. I don’t think the New York stage would be detrimental to him. But I do like the idea of having all those home-growns and the possibilities they provide. I’m willing as a fan to watch their careers unfold. I think the Yankees still have the offense that would allow these pitchers a chance to develop - succeeding overall while being “picked up” by that offense on occasion. But I wouldn’t be upset if the Yankees got Santana in the right deal.
“As far as Hughes goes, we HAVE seen enough to know what he can do. He’s a guy with a 90 MPH fastball and no out pitch.”
you are clueless.
Santana had an off year only in comparison to himself. He probably still had the best overall numbers in the AL. He had 235 strikeouts, walks-hits at 1.073 (usually under 1) His ERA was 3.33 - closer to the average than his usually under 3 He was the best pitcher in baseball, still.
That said, I’d keep Hughes and the kids. Lets roll with the kids, have some fun watching them develop (the good and the bad) and see the future.
http://www.replacementlevel.com/index.php/RLYW/direct/johan_and_the_al_east
the above link is an interesting simulation on the different trade options of yankee/red sox and santana.
one thing it leaves out is what the yankees could do with player acquisition with all the money saved on not getting santana if the red sox get him. the yankees would have appox 25 million to react to the three-four game swing that santana to the red sox would create.
the fact that the yankees have a 25 million optional chess move to make if santana goes to the red sox, to me, makes it worth taking the chance santana will be available for just money next fall.
“but do you take Johan for 7 years, knowing he could be at the top of your rotation for the next 4? ”
i see the arguments on both sides.
it’s a REALLY tough decision, and i don’t have an answer.
i can see the Yankees going for it, and i could see them walking away.
that’s the one thing that bothers me about this debate, people on either side claiming it is a “no brainer”.
if it were a no brainer, a trade would have been made already. maybe with the Yankees, maybe with the Red Sox, maybe with the Dodgers.
it’s NOT a no-brainer. if it were, there would be more teams involved.
the fact is that the price in talent and dollars is VERY VERY steep.
would anyone here argue that the Angels will get more wins out of Johan over the next 5 years than Torii Hunter? than why aren’t the Angels involved? why pay Torii Hunter $18M if you can get Johan for $20M?
it’s b/c giving ANY pitcher 7 years is a HUGE risk, and one with a very poor track record of being a good investment.
if the Yankees do it, i’ll understand their thinking. but it’s also silly to claim that they “HAVE TO” make a trade.
that’s really all i am saying.
while i’m not really on the fence so much as more in the camp of make the deal, I agree with the POV’s of both hmmm and doreen.
I can see both sides of the argument on the Yankees trading for Santana. Santana is a proven commodity but it’s fun to watch the kids develop.
I agree with Pete on the idea that keeping Hughes is a referendum on Cashman’s vision. However, when it comes to pitchers, Cashman has not exactly had 20/20 vision.
It is fun watching the kids develop but there will be hiccups along the way with the kids. I think Cashman is willing to live with those hiccups. I’m not as sure that some of you here will be willing to accept them when reality replaces rhetoric.
I think it also should be added that Hughes is very young and, because he was brought up so early, he will be in his prime (only 27) when he reaches free agency. Let’s get him back after the Twins develop him into an ace.
You develop young players for a number of reasons. One of which is that it enables you to have more options when constructing your roster. A couple of years ago, the Yanks wouldn’t have been able to get a meeting with the Twins about Santana because their farm system was barren. In other words, trading elite young talent for established elite talent is one of the reasons you want to develop a farm system. Do any Yank fans lament losing Russ Davis, who was a very good prospect, in the Tino/Jeff Nelson deal ten years ago?
I’m pretty torn about what the Yanks should do in regards to the Santana situation. I find Pete’s argument about the financial situation the most compelling. However, I don’t buy into his argument that this trade would be a turn away from the Yanks’ youth development philosophy. Sometimes you have to trade a Hanley Ramirez for a Josh Beckett.
At this point the Yanks should be getting players that can help them win a championship. The Yanks have no pitcher that is the same caliber as Beckett and the other top pitchers in the league.
I think you are just anti Santana and have been brainwashed by Cashman. Who cares about development when you have a 2 time cy young player avaliable, sounds like the Giants with Manning. Lets go with a player who has done it as ooposed to someone that might.
I hardly think that Johan thinks he is over the hill at 29 and I hardly think he is either.
Josh Beckett won’t cost $20 million a season and some luxury tax dollars.
Right, E-Roc, and my point is not to diminish the financial aspect of this deal. On the other hand, the Yanks might very well not lose someone as good as Hanley in the deal and might add the best pitcher in baseball. I used that deal as an analogy to point out that completing such a deal didn’t mean the end of youth development in Boston. It helped lead to a World Series. In fact, the Sox also got Lowell back in the deal, making them add a total of $18 million a year when they could have had Hanley cost-controlled.
An opinion about the Yankees from a guy who rocks a Pats hoodie means nothing to me.
You are obviously a Red Sox fan.
You see, I’m not so sure trading Hughes is a referendum of Cash’s vision because he has always said you develop pitchers of your own for two reasons: either to keep them to compete for you or to use them in trade to improve your team. However, if Hughes plus Kennedy are included in any trade, then I think you’re going back to what drove the Yankees for too many years - trading too many blue-chip prospects.
I do see, however, that if the Yankees can get the deal done including Kennedy INSTEAD of Hughes, it’s better all around - because as a p.r. statement, they would be saying they they’re keeping the guy who epitomizes the new direction - the guy who’s gotten all the press - the “franchise,” if you will. I believe Kennedy has the potential to be just as good, but the fan base is not as invested in Kennedy as they are in Hughes.
But who’s to say that Kennedy doesn’t end up succeeding and Hughes does not? It’s a crap shoot whatever they do.
Cashman has opened himself to some serious second guessing, when some of these young arms get injured as they were last year and don’t quite produce to the level that some seem to have elevated them to, the fans and the media will be in a foul mood, especially if Santana is in Boston throwing BB’s.
Hard for me to imagine that we could be so stupid as to let it happen. Brian Cashman has been radioactive and he sure has set himself up as ground zero on this one,
“In other words, trading elite young talent for established elite talent is one of the reasons you want to develop a farm system. Do any Yank fans lament losing Russ Davis, who was a very good prospect, in the Tino/Jeff Nelson deal ten years ago? ”
this is a good point.
however, go back to December 7, 1995 and substitute Derek Jeter for Russ Davis. now how would you feel about it? Jeter was just a “very good prospect” at that point (yes i realize this isn’t a perfect analogy).
but isn’t that really the crux of the argument? is Hughes a Davis or is he a Jeter??
the Yankees have to make that evaluation, and none of us sitting here on an internet message board know exactly what they think.
if you think he’s Davis, you do the trade, if you think he is Jeter, you don’t. simple as that, no?
that’s all they can do with the information they have now: make your best evaluation based on your scouts and your stats, and stick with your convictions. no one can see the future.
“Cashman has opened himself to some serious second guessing, when some of these young arms get injured as they were last year and don’t quite produce to the level that some seem to have elevated them to, the fans and the media will be in a foul mood”
if Brian Cashman made decisions based on the “mood” of Yankee fans and the media, the Yankees would be a TERRIBLE team.
C Gar, please apologize. You might disagree with me but calling me a Red Sox fan crosses a line. I didn’t grow up rooting for Cecilio Guante, Andy Hawkins, Rick Rhoden, Andy Stanky, Matt Nokes et al,, to have some new generation Bomber fan call me a Sox fan. Retract your comment now!
7 years is too long to sign ANY pitcher to a single contract.
Unless Santana would take a 4 or 5 year deal (including his remaining contract), keep the kids.
and even if he would take a 5 year deal, keep Hughes.
Trading a couple of prospects does not equate to changing the teams philosophy. Interesting that many posters who are so adament about not trading Hughes because of youth would be willing to let Kennedy go instead.
“but isn’t that really the crux of the argument? is Hughes a Davis or is he a Jeter??”
good point, although I think the crux of Pete’s argument is much more based on a dogma.
“Trade these guys now and the message is pretty clear: The Yankees are only paying lip service to development. This isn’t trading a few B-level prospects for Bobby Abreu in July. This would be an old-school Yankees move.”
What “old school” moves did the Yankee’s make that compare to trading Phil Hughes?
The last 10 or so years the only valuable player, raised in our farm system, we traded is Soriono. Which didn’t hurt.
“What “old school” moves did the Yankee’s make that compare to trading Phil Hughes?”
i’m assuming he is referring to the pre-Stick/Cashman days.
Al Leiter, Jay Buhner, Fred McGriff, etc.
Nick-YF,
Pete rocks the pats hoodie. I have no clue what you wear.
If you like the pats and the yanks you must be the scum of the earth.
Nope, I hate the Pats. Not a football fan, but I’m rooting badly for the G-Men to take those New Englanders down.
Sorry to the Phil fanatics, but that’s a deal that has to be made. IMO, Hughes doesn’t look like a guy who will be a true, dominant number one starter, like Santana already is.
I listened to the Yanks/Tigers game that Hughes started, and the Detroit radio guys were wondering what the hype was about after about the 20th HR Hughes gave up in that game.
Sorry to the Phil fanatics, but that’s a deal that has to be made. IMO, Hughes doesn’t look like a guy who will be a true, dominant number one starter, like Santana already is.
I listened to the Yanks/Tigers game that Hughes started, and the Detroit radio guys were wondering what the hype was about after about the 20th HR Hughes gave up in that game…
This isn’t about giving anyone, kids or vets, a “shot”. This is about putting together the best team possible.
Here is what I do not get as a Yankee fan.
For seven years now, we’ve all complained about not winning another World Series Title. Right now, if we get Johan Santana, we have the best shot to win a World Series.
Phil Hughes has the POTENTIAL to become a great ace pitcher.But right now, at this moment, Johan Santana is without question the best pitcher in baseball. He is 29 years old, a left handed pitcher, and can match up with the Red Sox Josh Beckett.
We give up Hughes, Cabrera, and Jeff Marquez for the best picher in baseball… a pitcher the Yankees need badly. Santana provides secuirty in that rotation.
We need him if we want to win a World Series this season and future seasons. He’s not old, he’s not on the downside of his carreer… he still is the best.
And aren’t the Yankees always about being and having the best?
Pete -
It seems that your opinion is of the majority in here… but we’ll see how many people stand up and admit they were wrong if Hughes is nothing more than a pretty good #3 starter. The idea of Hughes being a dominant #1 is awesome and I really hope it happens. I dont think anybody can argue that the best scenario is keeping Hughes and having him develop into a future hall of famer. It’s just that the likelihood of Hughes outperforming Santana is slim and its a bit surprising that people seem to challenge that.
Well said Pete and couldn’t agree more. . .if only Hank felt the same way.
I just got a #65 Yankees t-shirt for Christmas, I really hope I can make use of it for years to come in support of “Franchise” Phil.
“The last 10 or so years the only valuable player, raised in our farm system, we traded is Soriono. Which didn’t hurt.”
How about Mike Lowell and Jake Westbrook? Wily Mo Pena? Nick Johnson? Juan Rivera?
hmmm December 27th, 2007 at 10:38 am
“What “old school” moves did the Yankee’s make that compare to trading Phil Hughes?”
i’m assuming he is referring to the pre-Stick/Cashman days.
Al Leiter, Jay Buhner, Fred McGriff, etc.
———-
I did say the last 10 or so years
Trading Al Leiter, Jay Buhner and Fred McGriff for peanuts does not compare to a hugues for santana deal.
you can compare it to soriano for a rod.
which i think worked out well for us
“I listened to the Yanks/Tigers game that Hughes started, and the Detroit radio guys were wondering what the hype was about after about the 20th HR Hughes gave up in that game…”
PULL THE TRIGGAH!1!1!!!
seriously, there are many many reasons to make this trade.
this is not one of them.
holy crap, what pitcher springs fully-formed at 21 years old into a major league ace??
when Johan HIMSELF was 21 years old he had an era of 6.49.
he gave up more HRs per 9 innings than Hughes did.
Johan at 21:
2-3, 6.49 ERA, 1.15 HR/9, 6.7 K/9, 5.6 BB/9
Phil at 21:
5-3, 4.46 ERA, .99 HR/9, 7.2 K/9, 3.6 BB/9
again, there are many good arguments in favor of the trade. using 1 bad start in his rookie season is not one of them.
plank, you can go through every big market team and find a laundry list of traded prospects that turned out to be pretty good. bottom line - you make the best moves you can. if you got burned in a deal in 2001 and you let that prevent you from making the right deal today, that’s a problem. bringing up the guys from the past is valid, it just shouldnt keep the yankees from making this deal IF they feel its for the benefit of the team.
good point hmmm…. people with bias find whatever limited evidence they can to support their argument rather than look at the whole picture.
How about Mike Lowell and Jake Westbrook? Wily Mo Pena? Nick Johnson? Juan Rivera?
give me a break… you can’t compare them to Phil
WWW.MLBTRADERUMORS.COM
LEN3 checks in with the latest Johan Santana rumors this evening.
The Mets appear to be a solid contender, even without offering up Jose Reyes. Neal ponders whether the Twins would prefer to send Santana to the NL so they can avoid him. Matthew Cerrone has been saying this for some time, adding that Santana would prefer to come to the NL as well.
Interesting note - Neal says Kei Igawa’s name has surfaced in regards to the Yankees talks. It wouldn’t materially change the deal though.
Neal says talks with the Red Sox are currently dormant.
and what have Wily Mo, Nick Johnson, Juan Rivera or Jake Westbrook really done to say the Yankees have missed them?
Every team has prospects they’ve traded away that in hindsight, you’d say that they’d have had a chance to be good in pinstripes, Lowell among them for the Yankees…
but these other guys above dont count in that argument… and in fact, you could argue that they are the reasons for sending Phil Hughes away, no?
“I did say the last 10 or so years
Trading Al Leiter, Jay Buhner and Fred McGriff for peanuts does not compare to a hugues for santana deal.”
i wasn’t arguing with you, just guessing at what Pete was referring to.
Keep Hughes. Good post Pete. Majority of Yankee Fans want to keep Hughes from everything I have read.
if it is a tought deision and not a clear cut decision which will cost the yanks about $200 mill. you do not make it.
gamble that Minny will not trade Johan and sign him next yr. the financial costs which everyone says does not affect the yanks will be mitigated and they will keep Hughes.
BTW the Yanks do need to look at finances like everyone else…
The long term contracts for pitchers NEVER ARE WORTH IT.. I know Santana is different but again they never work ou