Twinkie Town: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:



Around SBN: Explaining the Mets' bullpen struggles Bar-right-arrows



Santana's Return

Let's browse through the four players who will shortly be on their way to the Minnesota Twins.

While it's difficult to imagine that a deal of this magnitude could have gone down without garnering a marquee name like Hughes or Ellsbury, it's important to remember that trades like this are more than skin deep.  At face value, the Mets robbed the Twins of their biggest and best commodity, and at the current juncture it's difficult to see it any other way.  We, as fans, develop an attachment to players, and it's easy to feel as though something or someone was taken from us without our consent.  In reality, however, we won't know who "got the best" of this transaction for many years.  Three of the prospects aren't MLB-ready, and for Gomez and Guerra, their true contributions may not be all told for another ten years.

It's always easy to review a trade like this on the day that it happened and state with earnest despair that the Twins were severly undersold.  Fortunately for us, this isn't the whole story.  I don't expect this to make anyone feel better; it doesn't necessarily make me feel better.  But it is true.

Let's take a look at four young men who will have a world of pressure thrust upon them from the Twins fan community.

Carlos Gomez, OF
Born:  12/04/1985    B/T:  R/R
Height:  6' 2"    Weight:  170 lbs


Year  Age  Lvl   AB  2B  HR   SB  BB  SO   Avg   Obp   Slg
2004   18   Rk  150  10   1    8   5  29  .287  .333  .427
2005   19    A  487  13   8   64  32  88  .275  .331  .376
2006   20   AA  430  24   7   41  27  97  .281  .349  .423
2007   21  AAA  140   8   2   17  15  23  .286  .363  .414
Minors         1291  62  18  141  82 250  .278  .339  .399

When originally discussing the Mets as one of the Twins' trade suitors, this is what I said about Carlos:

Gomez is a defensive prospect, and is one of my top center field prospects that we'll be discussing over the next few days.  Strong arm, good range and great speed make him a better natural center fielder than Milledge, although he doesn't appear to have Milledge's offensive upside.  He needs work on his strike zone judgement and, hopefully, can develop some power.  Carlos Gomez could be a very exciting player.

Largely thought of as this transaction's "center piece", Gomez currently projects as a speedy defensive-oriented player who will sit at the bottom of the batting order.  His walk-to-strikeout ratio certainly appeared headed in the right direction during his time at AAA New Orleans last summer, but split his time between there and New York.  In his 125 major league at-bats, Gomez hit .232/.288/.304.

Carl Crawford, Tampa Bay's exciting and speedy outfielder, has some comparisons to Carlos Gomez.  While Crawford was a year younger at each level, he climed one level a season before reaching the majors.  He struck out a lot, walked rarely, stole a lot of bases and didn't hit for power.  Crawford had just over 400 more at-bats in the minor leagues than the former Mets prospect, but his line of .295/.336/.400 is very similar to Gomez's .278/.339/.399.

Phil Humber, RHP
Born:  12/21/1982    B/T:  R/R
Height:  6' 4"    Weight:  210 lbs


Year  Age   Lvl     IP   ERA   H/9  HR/9  BB/9   K/9  WHIP
2005   22    A+   70.1  4.99  9.47  0.77  2.30  8.32  1.31
2006   23    A+   38.0  2.37  5.68  0.95  2.13  8.53  0.87
2006   23    AA   34.1  2.88  6.55  1.05  2.62  9.44  1.02
2007   24   AAA  139.0  4.27  8.35  1.36  2.85  7.77  1.24
Minors           289.2  4.11  8.18  1.09  2.61  8.28  1.20

John Sickels, who writes over at SBNation site MinorLeagueBall, gives Humber a B- prospect grade.  Armed with a low-90's fastball, big curve and a "power" change up, Humber has the tools to be a moderate strikeout threat if he can keep the latter two pitches working.  He's fully recovered from Tommy John surgery, and after two very brief stints in the majors for the Mets in '06 and '07 is the most major league ready player Minnesota is getting in the deal.

It's believed that the gap between who he is and who he can be is small, and as a result the Twins should be able to look to him for immediate help going into 2008.  He'll likely be competing for a job in the rotation, and with no clear-cut ace it's nearly impossible to know where he fits in between the number one and number five slots.  All the same he's a talented pitcher who could be a solid number two, but projects closer to an average number three or four starter.  If the Twins want to give him an opportunity to start 30 games this summer, he could be a pleasant surprise.

Deolis Guerra, RHP
Born:  04/17/1989    B/T:  R/R
Height:  6' 5"    Weight:  200 lbs


Year  Age   Lvl     IP   ERA   H/9  HR/9  BB/9   K/9  WHIP
2006   17     A   81.2  2.20  6.50  0.33  4.08  7.05  1.18
2007   18    A+   89.2  4.01  8.03  0.90  2.51  6.62  1.17
Minors           178.2  3.28  7.47  0.66  3.43  6.82  1.21

Guerra gets a B+ grade from Sickels, who believes that this pitcher was the number two prospect in the Mets farm system.  Over at John's site he held a poll asking his readers, on a scale of 1 to 10, "how good of a prospect is Guerra?"  He received mostly votes for a 7, followed by 6 and 8.  Check out the thread for some good discussion.

With a low to mid-90's fastball and a curveball (work in progress), it's said that Guerra's changeup is his best pitch.  Certainly, looking at his existing minor league line there isn't much to point out to get elated over.  Still, he'll only be 19 this summer and was thought of very highly within the Mets organization.  As he matures, all three pitches should emerge as better than average; the changeup is already impressing scouts and the curve is, at times, showing a good, sharp break.  Guerra is young and is still a shaky projection, but there's a decent ceiling that hopefully can begin to develop further with the Twins this summer.

Kevin Mulvey, RHP
Born:  05/26/1985    B/T:  R/R
Height:  6' 1"    Weight:  170 lbs


Year  Age   Lvl     IP   ERA   H/9  HR/9  BB/9   K/9  WHIP
2007   22    AA  151.2  3.32  8.60  0.24  2.55  6.53  1.24
Minors           173.0  3.02  8.22  0.26  2.50  6.45  1.19

This will only be Mulvey's second full season in the minor leagues, and he received a B/B+ prospect grade from John Sickels.  Mulvey's fastball clocks in the low to mid-90's, but has a larger arsenal than the other two pitchers en route to Minnesota.  In addition to the major league ready four-seam fastball Kevin throws a change, a curve and a slider as his strikeout pitch.  Back in 2006 in sounds like he possessed an "all-occasion" two-seam fastball, but I didn't see any recent reports duplicating that information in 2007.

In yesterday's thread on the Twins-Mets trade, Roger brough up how similar Mulvey is to our own Anthony Swarzak.  While Swarzak is a year younger, has thrown many more minor league innings and has yet to breach AAA, overall minor league numbers do have similarities.

Pitcher  '07 Age     IP   H/9  HR/9  BB/9   K/9  WHIP
Swarzak     21    446.0  8.52  0.50  2.76  8.54  1.25
Mulvey      22    173.0  8.22  0.26  2.50  6.45  1.19

While Mulvey may not have Swarzak's strikeouts, he still has some decent peripherals.  In the end a vast majority of Mulvey's career minor league line comes from his 173 innings in AA Binghamton last summer; there's a lot yet to be learned about this one.  He still has something to prove, and while his ceiling isn't as high as Guerra's the scouting reports are positive.  We may have to wait a year before we know how good of a find Mulvey is, but looking at his collegiate numbers there's reason for optimism.  He's been able to hold on to those ridiculously low HR/9 marks, he has the ability to tally some strikeouts, and he shows plus control.

Wrap

These four players aren't bad players.  They simply aren't Philip Hughes, Melky Cabrera, Jacoby Ellsbury or Jon Lester.  Both Carlos Gomez and Deolis Guerra have a chance to turn into special players, Phil Humber will more than likely break camp with the Twins in the spring, and Kevin Mulvey has some upside as well.

Even after we've separated our feelings of "what we should have received" from "what exactly did we get", it's going to be hard to be happy with what transpired yesterday.  That's entirely natural, because we did just trade the best starting pitcher in baseball.  Just remember that this deal was made with the future in mind, which coincides with A) not bringing back Torii Hunter, B) trading for one of the game's most promising young hitters and C) locking up Justin Morneau and Michael Cuddyer to long-term deals.

If there's any objectivity, we could step back and begin to see what kind of a plan Bill Smith has put into action for the Twins.  While he may not have made the deal we wanted him to make, he has acted clearly and decisively with the options available to him.  Who knows, years from now we may look back on this trade as one that favored the Twins.

0 recs | Comment 36 comments

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

Display:

Heh
"Just remember that this deal was made with the future in mind..."

Does this really need to be said? Everything this organization does is with "the future" in mind, but that future never actually gets here. It gets traded/low-balled/ignored until it's too late. I'm pretty sure everyone (fans AND players) is sick of always citing "the future." Eventually you've got to roll the dice with what you've spent so long assembling, or it's all meaningless. Johan was the find of the decade, and we just traded that away for this infamous, ever-elusive "future."

Replace Nick Punto.

by rayken on Jan 30, 2008 2:08 AM EST   0 recs

Yep
I agree completely.  The future is always two years off with this team.  If the Twins were planning to go into rebuilding mode this year, why not take a shot last year?  Maybe it wouldn't have made a difference anyway, but why not at least try?  Instead they played for the future.... just like they always do.

by Jon Marthaler on Jan 30, 2008 2:15 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

But we
were playing for the future by trading Santana...no matter who we got in return.

I'm not saying that I'm not frustrated, because I am.  It was incredibly difficult writing what I just did, because I'm still pissed off about it.

And really...I have to believe that the Twins are playing for the future, and that this is a system that will eventually work.  I have to believe that, or I'll lose my damn mind.

by Jesse on Jan 30, 2008 2:22 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

Where's the beef?
You know. I'm trying to like this trade, but I just can't. I want at least one proven bat for Santana....then you can tag on as many prospects as you want.

I don't mind all the prospects but we get nothing proven from this deal--not even one bat. If one of these pitchers becomes another incredible player, then will we be laughing all the way to the bank? Ah, no; unless that player is Gomez, and that is iffy. (He is not a power hitter at all.) It will be the same old Twins losing 2-1.

My other question is this: What is it about the Mets that make the Twins aquiesce to getting taken like this. This is like the Castillo debacle repeated. Fool me once......How is the deal with the Red Sox or Yankees worse than what we ended up getting? I can't see it, frankly.

Convince me someone..I'm begging you!

by Skippy tastes better than Jiff on Jan 30, 2008 4:04 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

The big difference...
...is Johan out of the AL. I agree, the deals offered by the Yanks and BoSox were better. But if Johan went to either of them (particularly the Yanks), the Wild Card is off the table for years. And the playoffs become one hell of a nightmare. Not having to make it through a Santana-shaped firewall to make it to the postseason = decent prospect.
http://www.realityfish.com

by Robin G on Jan 30, 2008 4:14 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

Santana Firewall
That is an excellent point, but the Mets were still not forced to sacrifice even one major league ready player for the best pitcher in all of baseball. It is hard for me to buy that. The Twins have arguably the best player period on the table, but they can't get a proven bat.

by Skippy tastes better than Jiff on Jan 30, 2008 4:21 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

True, but...
...did the Mets have a MLB-ready player in their farm system? I mean, Fernando Martinez is only in AA. He's 19 years old.

Don't get me wrong, I would have loved to see Jose Reyes in the Metrodome. Hell, I would have liked to see El Duque. We're going to be hard up fo proven starting this year. But the reason the Mets were willing to deal with us (or rather, deal with the kind of contract that Johan will demand) is because they are so hard up for pitching. There wasn't anyone they could have given us and not be generating insane new holes for themselves.

A three-way deal would have been better, but apparently Omar doesn't go for menage a trois. Unfortunate.

http://www.realityfish.com

by Robin G on Jan 30, 2008 4:40 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

did the mets have a major leauge ready player?
Heilmann

Church

Maine

Martinez

Sánchez, Duaner

Feliciano, Pedro

and not that I'd be too thrilled but Hernández, Orlando.

They are all major league ready and some of them are pretty good.

This trade was crap and the only way the Twins are going to redeam themselves is if they can go out and get Bedard or maybe Blanton.

by doofus04 on Jan 30, 2008 7:09 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

Also
All this crap I'm hearing about the Twins making out like bandits in the past is crap too, because back then we had no hope or didn't need the player.  After the offseason we had to date, we were looking like a solid contender for the upcomming season.  Granted Detroit and Cleveland look strong if not better on paper, we still had a solid shot at the playoffs.  Giving up the season is unforgivable especially before it even begins.

by doofus04 on Jan 30, 2008 7:13 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

I disagree.
Heilman's a righty reliever, which we don't need.

Church probably couldn't handle our centerfield, although he wouldn't be a bad idea.

Maine is one of their starting pitchers, and the reason the Mets were involved was because they were screwed for starting pitching. Santana would obviously be an improvement over Maine, but they would still be keeping a hole that they had no one to fill. They weren't going to cough up any of their current starting 'ro.

With regards to Martinez, if you mean Fernando, I covered that above; if you mean Pedro, same as for Maine, but with a much heartier does of no chance.

Sanchez is another right handed reliever we don't need, with the added benefit of coming off of shoulder surgery.

Feliciano would have been nice. We need a reliable lefty reliever. On the other hand, so does everyone else in the world, so they might have not been willing to part with him.

Was Johan worth all of those people? Yes. But realistically, Minaya was already gulping at the size of the contract, the Yanks were out, and Boston had scaled back their offer. Generally speaking, when you're dealing with someone who knows they're the only real game in town, you don't walk away with the #2, 3, 4, and 7 of their farm system. From that perspective, we didn't do too badly.

http://www.realityfish.com

by Robin G on Jan 30, 2008 7:34 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

No you don't
You don't have to believe that. You're trying to make yourself follow like a good little lemming, but you don't have to drink the kool-aid. You can feel free to deride the organization for putting the screws to the fanbase by treating us like idiots, assuming we are always looking down the road and will always accept the fact that we "can't play with the big boys." If we can't play with the big boys ever, then why bother showing up at the gate at all?

This is quickly becoming a joke. If they're not willing to play ball once in a while, why should we show up and watch?

by neide on Jan 30, 2008 9:28 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

We did take a shot last year
It didn't work out too well. But going into last year, a lot of people all over baseball thought this team could at least duplicate 2006, considering that the 2006 team got off to such a slow start. Least year was our last gasp with the remnants of the 2002 core. And Johan was one of the guys who did not perform at the level he had in 2006. So we struggled.

If we couldn't contend with Hunter and Silva, how could we contend without them? You have to see if hanging onto Johan give you a good shot this year. And a lot of people think it doesn't. So going for it this year meant not only keeping Johan for one year, but adding to the team to make a run. And that is easier said than done.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Jan 30, 2008 9:20 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

Don't forget
Santana's record against Cleveland last year:  0-5.

There's something about seeing a guy 5 times a year for a number of years.  They learned to foul off his change-up and sit on the fastball, which, sooner or later, came in where they could hit it.

He gave up 32 homers and coughed up some leads in the sixth and seventh against teams like the Rays and A's.  

Sure, I loved having Santana, but he was and is mortal, did not want to stay in Minny and now gets a chance on the national stage--and with his bat in hand.  He'll likely strike out more hitters and field a lower ERA, pitching against pitchers.

Bully for Johan.

Move on people.  This is life in big market America where you enjoy what you can afford.

by Old Twins Cap on Jan 30, 2008 9:54 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

+1
I struggled to understand why he was scuffling for so many starts last year. In the end, it was clear that familiarity was the problem. He would need to develop another pitch--a cut fastball or a curve or something--to continue to pitch in the next four years as well as he has in the last four against this division.

I think that influenced his desire to move. Imagine dominating for three years and then needing to throw 100 pitches for six innings and fight for every out. The temptation to go to another league and division and have some breathing room must have been overpowering. Also, he loves to hit. All things considered, I really think he drove this deal towards the Mets.

Perhaps the Twins were close to a deal with the Sox at the winter meetings, and Santana and his agent made it clear that he really didn't want to go there. In other words, he would take less money to go with the Mets than the two AL teams. And his price for the Sox was too rich for their blood. So Smith was forced to go back to the drawing board and work with the Mets. Then he set a deadline that forced Smith to take the Mets last offer as of Jan 31 minus 72 hours.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Jan 30, 2008 10:27 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

Totally agree
His pitch counts were getting higher on fewer results.  He couldn't throw the slider, either because of his split nail or lack of confidence.  And yes, if you watch the Tigers and Indians games, players like Ordonez, Guillen, Sizemore, and especially Martinez, had a knack for slapping the change-up foul.

From everything I see and read, Santana is a gamer and loves the idea of hitting and running the bases.   No doubt he wanted the NL; it's a great move and will really pad his stats.

Who knows if either NY or Sox would have given him a contract?  There's a lot of electrons being wasted on outrage.

But people should not forget that the core of Mauer, Cuddyer, Morneau, Young and even Kubel and Lamb is a pretty solid major league line-up.  Add a young improving speedster or two, like Gomez and Casilla, and you will score runs.

And, I personally like having all the young arms to call on, especially Slowey, Blackburn, Perkins and Mulvey.

Most of baseball success is based on improvement of young talent and established talent having a great year.  In that regard, the Twins will be in the mix for years to come IMHO.

by Old Twins Cap on Jan 30, 2008 12:25 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Hmmmm . . .
I understand the anger but seriously did any of you watch the Twins post 91-2000?  I'm sure I'll get jumped at by people who have been fans since the 60's.  The Twins have been taking a shot at it the best way they can the last 5 or 6 years by winning the division 4 times.  Yes, I know, empty playoff appearances but in the 90's I would have been salivating for that.  

The Twins were taking shots then, maybe not by trading away the future for one player like Soriano or Carlos Lee but still trying extremely hard.

I can go through a thousand ifs but seriously the year the Angels won it all they were on a tear and the Twins lost their magic after eliminating Oakland.

Then when we damn near went up 2 games to none in Yankee Stadium.

Then our team just frickin choked in 2006 after tearing up the last half of the season.

This team has been taking shots and they just haven't worked out.  

The way I see it, Santana wanted out of here and we had to get what we could for him.  I now see that we might have been overstating his trade value with the huge contract he'll be getting.

I think the Twins have done a great job setting themselves up so in another year they could be really good again.  With the abundance of young pitchers all so close to the majors, there's a great chance we field a pretty amazing rotation very soon.  Our offense is set up with an array of high potential young hitters.  Gomez could very well be an amazing leadoff man.  Young should be a monster and we already have seen firsthand what Morneau, Mauer, Cuddy, and Kubel can do when they're in stride.  If Gomez develops into the leadoff hitter some think he can be this offense could be a buzz saw and everyone(important)on it is locked up for 3 or more years.  

Sorry this got so long.  I just get frustrated when people complain about this team when they've been on one of the most successful 6 year runs in team history (obviously not as good as 87-91).  Please jump all over my opinions but I just wanted to show a little optimism.  

and lastly, at least we're not Devil Rays fans, talk about an abyss stuck under the Sox, Yanks, and Blue Jays.

by halfchest on Jan 30, 2008 2:34 AM EST   0 recs

Doping? Myself I'd like a pony!
Does anyone still think that doping is the big issue here?  That the the various agencies' #1 priority is to eradicate doping?  That rules don't get bent when it suits any of them?  That there is no rule of law here, just a struggle for power?
--------
http://www.vcao.net

by danielbank on Jan 30, 2008 2:47 AM EST   0 recs

Hrm.
MLB Fleece Factor has a link to some pretty encouraging info on our new guys.

I'm not unhappy with this. Remember that the Mets have never had a very good farm system, particularly with regards to pitcher development -- how much will these guys improve under our care? Also, it cannot be forgotten how much of a benefit it is to us to not have Johan in the AL. With the Tigers going for broke for the next few years, we're more likely to be competing for the wild card than the division, so having Johan kicking ass and taking names for the BoSox or the Yanks would have affected our postseason chances in a profound way.

Mostly I'm happy that I can still root for him. I don't care much about the NL, but now the Mets are my favorite alterna-team. It'll also be exciting to see Johan with regular at-bats. I suspect that's one of the reasons this happened -- it's seemed all along that he wanted to go to the NL, and the Mets were the only ones that could find the money.

Also, Mulvey's HR/9 rate is consistent and amazing. I was surprised to find he's not a sinkerballer. I'm very interested to see how he goes.

No one can deny that this is going to be an exciting year.

http://www.realityfish.com

by Robin G on Jan 30, 2008 4:10 AM EST   0 recs

Bedard?
Is there any realisitic possibility or discussion about Smith potentially turning some of our pitching prospects back around into a Bedard deal?  That deal appears to have stalled a bit and we've shown with our most recent contract offer to Santana that we're willing to add some payroll.

Thoughts?

by sportsvulture on Jan 30, 2008 8:59 AM EST   0 recs

More on Bedard
The reasoning behind a possible Bedard deal (I'm grasping for anything here):
  1. Santana wanted out and we clearly weren't going to meet his contract demands.
  2. Bedard is signed (arbitration eligible next two years, free agent in 2010)
  3. Twins have oodles of young pitching talent to offer
  4. With the loss of Santana's contract and their reported $100M extension offer, they've demonstrated the potential to pay for the ace.
  5. Bedard deal to Seattle has been inexplicably stalled for a couple days
Was it possibly too complex (given the contract extension period required for the Mets & Johan) to do a three way trade so the O's are waiting for the Twins?

Am i crazy?  And would it be worth it and what would it take?

by sportsvulture on Jan 30, 2008 9:17 AM EST   0 recs

I don't think we can compete with Seattle
You're not crazy. I brought this up a couple of weeks ago and I don't think I'm crazy. But the Seattle deal is arguably better for the Orioles than this deal is for the Twins. And it's not held up in Seattle. It's on Angelos' desk. If he won't approve that one, how can we do better?

Now, I would be in favor of acquiring a lower-profile, higher upside guy with some of the pieces we have in reserve, especially good young starters. I mentioned Gorzelanny in a previous post (though I'm not thrilled with his peripherals). I haven't done a lot of digging, but Kyle Kendrick is another name i would throw out there. That's the kind of guy I would go after.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Jan 30, 2008 9:35 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

More on Bedard
This from the Baltimore Sun (via mlbtraderumors.com):

http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/baseball/bal-bedard0130,0,7596411.story?track=rss

Takeaways:

  1. McPhail says there are now other teams involved than Seattle
  2. There have been whispers that OF Adam Jones has an injury they don't want to take on (degenerative hip)
  3. From the article: The Orioles rejected the Mets' offer of outfielder Carlos Gomez, reliever Aaron Heilman and pitching prospect Phil Humber. Two of those players -- Gomez and Humber -- are reportedly headed to the Minnesota Twins for ace Johan Santana, so the Mets are no longer in the running.
  4. McPhail obviously has Twins ties and probably some comfort level with the decision makers here.
The Twins could sweeten that orignal Mets offer significantly without digging too deeply.

by sportsvulture on Jan 30, 2008 9:40 AM EST   0 recs

Not Gomez
Anything's possible, but one of the goals was to replace Hunter's defense long term. Gomez is the best shot at this. If we can get Bedard without giving up Gomez, fine. But I would be hesitant to give up that piece.
"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Jan 30, 2008 9:44 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

I can't believe it!
I'm here in NY and I can't believe this is the deal you ended up taking! I'm a Yankee fan and I thank your GM for not grabbing Hughes, Cabrera, Marquez and a fourth prospect rumored to be either Horne, Jackson or Tabata.

As a Yankee fan, I'm tired of buying players and, win or lose, I want to give the kids a chance.

That being said, your goal should be to make your team the best it can be. Your goal shouldn't be blocking the Bosox and Yanks from getting Santana. Who knows, he could get injured in the first year.

Because your GM handled the whole thing so poorly, you get relative crap back in return. He had two excellent deals on the table and didn't pull the trigger. When some one offers you a good deal, you accept it as quickly as you can before they back out.  

   

by jack on Jan 30, 2008 11:01 AM EST   0 recs

Ha
Thanks Jack, rub it in.

by Jesse on Jan 30, 2008 11:19 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

negotiation
When some one offers you a good deal, you accept it as quickly as you can before they back out.

If walking away and keeping what you have is not an option, then you're absolutely right.

At the time, I thought that was an option, but now I'm not sure it ever really was.

by adam on Jan 30, 2008 11:59 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

What next.....
Of course, there's the Nathan question. Four years...$50 million perhaps? More or less?

Do the Twins still go after another centerfielder right before spring training starts if one is available? There's still a few guys out there looking for some sort of contract. Better to have Loften or Corey Patterson to play/be on bench (instead of Monroe)? Not much out there. Brady Clark? Ugh!

Is there a veteran starter the Twins should have to balance out the rotation? Is this the year they should've started with, say, Ponson and Ortiz...then worked Liriano and Perkins into the rotation as the season is a few months old and cut the old guys? Is Hernandez now a viable free agent since the Mets got Santana? Any chance of bringing back Kyle Lohse? Hey, Eric Milton needs a job!

Or do the Twins stay young. Gomez in center. Pridie as the abckup. Monroe off the bench. Baker, Bonser, Slowey, Humber as starters. Liriano worked into the picture. Perkins and Duensing in the minors as backup.

I see the need for lots of 2-3 inning releif stints. Put Guerrier back in that role. Expand the need for Crain and Rincon to NOT just setup Nathan. Keep Neshek as the primary setup guy. Go to Reyes as little as possible,

check out Twinkies autograph collection at www.TwinsCards.com

by twintown on Jan 30, 2008 11:41 AM EST   0 recs

disappointing
What I don't get is how come every team in the league has no problem fleecing the Mets except us? No, we have to go give them Johan Flippin' Santana for four question marks. aargghhhh!

by adam on Jan 30, 2008 1:32 PM EST   0 recs

disappointing (part II)
So obviously we were not able to get Omar to include Martinez.  But if we had to settle, couldn't we at least get one more throw-in: some low-level guy with a bat with some upside?

I mean come on.  Throw me a freakin' bone, here.

by adam on Jan 30, 2008 2:02 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

This excuse for a team
...is so busy looking to the future, that they forget you need to win in the PRESENT to get a ring.

by MNPundit on Jan 30, 2008 1:43 PM EST   0 recs

OK
So how do you think the Twins would get a ring this year? Even with Santana, it's a stretch, especially how he pitched against the two division rivals last year:

Cleveland: 0-5
Detroit: 1-3

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Jan 30, 2008 2:04 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Santana
That's not how he pitched, that's what happened in the games he pitched.  

If you are interested in how he pitched:

Against Cleveland in 6 starts:
39 IP, 43/9 K/BB, 4.38 ERA (3 QS, including 2 starts where he went 7 IP, 2 ER).  Should have won at least 3 of his starts.

Against Tigers, also in 6 starts:
37 IP, 36/12 K/BB, 3.65 ERA (pulled after 3 IP in his last start of the year and had 4/5 in QS in the others). Again, probably should have been 4-1 or so with 1 ND.  

C'mon, we're past this on Santana.  With decent offense in those games, he ends up with a winning record against those teams, and had 7 QS out of 12 (11 if you discount the last start of the year when they pulled him early).  

by Diggity Dino on Jan 30, 2008 4:12 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Fair enough
But you just made my point. Even with Santana's best efforts, this team (minus Hunter and Bartlett plus Young, Everette, Harris, Pridie and Lamb) was 1-9 in his starts against the main division rivals. I just don't see how the team's results would be that much better this year against Detroit and Cleveland. And if they're not better, you just shot your wad with even less to show for it.
"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Jan 30, 2008 4:46 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Moot Point
Clearly, this is moot, but I don't think we can take these specific 10-12 games and say the Twins offense (which is really what we are talking about, since Santana's pitching kept them in the game) will perform equally putridly.  

Additionally, I think the offense is improved from last year, so I think I could argue that
1) Regression to the team's "mean" performance
and
2) Improved offense

would have helped them in those regards.

If you are really arguing that Santana would have gone 1-10 against them this year, then the logically corollary would be that Blackburn/Duensing/whoever, as Santana's replacements, will go 0-11 since they are worse than Santana.

Either way, it is moot now.

by Diggity Dino on Jan 30, 2008 6:38 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Not my argument
If you are really arguing that Santana would have gone 1-10 against them this year, then the logically corollary would be that Blackburn/Duensing/whoever, as Santana's replacements, will go 0-11 since they are worse than Santana.

What I'm arguing is that there's a risk of the Twins not being in a position to best the division rivals even with Santana. The Twins are better, on paper. But so are the division rivals. And until you see how a team comes together, you don't know how they'll respond. And they're not that much better on paper. So it's a pretty big risk to keep Santana, quite possibly still lose and get two draft picks instead of four top prospects.

If Santana didn't have the no-trade, it changes everything. You can go into the season and see how the team responds. If they're in it at the break, you're buyers. If they're not, you're sellers. You at least give it a shot and you don't risk all that much.

The no-trade put Santana in the driver's seat. And I'm convinced he decided that now is the time to go to the NL. If he has another year like last year (or worse), his FA value goes down. This way, he effectively gets the maximum payout from the Mets, and he gets a chance to pitch against guys who have rarely seen him, if ever.

"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot

by cmathewson on Jan 31, 2008 12:16 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

I continue to maintain: 2006
2006 was the Year. That was the year we should have mortgaged the future. I believed from the beginning 2007 would be a rebuilding/training year (click the link for what I said).

It's too late to do it NOW of course. But the Franchise as a whole should have done it in 2006. Now they have no choice. But even when they finish rebuilding they're not going to ever take a risk for a ring. No one in our organization will ever take a risk like that.

by MNPundit on Jan 30, 2008 9:18 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

TT is an SB Nation blog of, by and for the fans. We strive to be the best Minnesota Twins blog by providing quality content and analysis, as well as daily news and notes on the team. We hope you'll make Twinkie Town your home for all things Twins!

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
Minor League Report...August 2, 2008
Small
Minor League Report...July 26, 2008

Recent FanPosts

Small
The Stats: Stretching Nathan Out
Small
span SPAN! Span?
Images_small
Nathan in the 8th
3twin041008_small
Minor League Bullpen Help
Small
Livan To the Rockies
Small
Relief Help is their now.
Images_small
What's Going On?
Small
Manny being money
Small
Twins Free Agent Signings--A Review

Post_icon New FanPost All FanPosts Carrot-mini


Editor-In-Chief

Twinkietown_small Jesse

Senior Writer

Hrbek_small Jon Marthaler

Fatty_small cmathewson

Moderators

Images_small AdamOnFirst

ad

Site Meter