Can't believe there isn't a thread on it already, or perhaps I've missed it. Feel free to delete this one then. But here is the scoop:

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3220894

Gordon Edes and Nick Cafardo - Sox lose out on Santana bid; Santana appears headed to Mets

Red Sox sources confirmed today that pitcher Johan Santana is headed to the New York Mets, ending their pursuit of the two-time Cy Young Award winner. USA Today broke the news of the deal, in which the Mets are sending four prospects to the Twins and now will have 72 hours to sign Santana to a contract extension.

The prospects are reported to be pitchers Philip Humber, Kevin Mulvey, and Deolis Guerra, as well as outfielder Carlos Gomez, according to the New York Daily News.

If the Mets can now work out a contract with Santana over the next 72 hours, it appears all of Boston's top prospects are safe and sound.

I love this. Best possible outcome in my eyes.

Absolutely the best outcome. We keep our prospects and Santana pitches in the NL.

agreed...i had mixed feelings about the cost of the RS getting him but not only is he not a MFY he isn't even in the American League....

I reserve my reactions until/when/if the Mets can finalize this over the next 3 days. The way ESPN is reporting this, if the Mets can't come to terms w/ Santana over the next 72 hrs., the RS are next in line.

I'd be shocked if it doesn't happen; despite "tampering" rules, you just know there's a way the Mets and Johan decided on a year/dollar figure in advance.

This'll get done, and whopeeeeee. Because I really want to see Lester/Ellsbury in Sox uni's.

However... I really would have liked to have seen Beckett/Santana/Buchholz as well... kind of 1970's Oriolish, or early-90's Bravesian 1-2-3 goodness.

I don't understand how this can be the best possible outcome. Wouldn't the best possible outcome be the Red Sox having a rotation of Santana/Beckett/Daisuke/XXX for the next 6-7 years? How can people say "Oh thank God he's not going to the Yankees" but say "we don't want to give up talent for him to be on the Sox." If this is true, shouldn't we WANT the Yankees to get him because the talent they'd give up >> Santana (the inequality that people are applying to Santana and the Sox)?

Don't get me wrong, like I said in the other thread in RSoTF, this is easily the 1-B scenario. But guys with a 6 year ERA+ average which reaches 155 don't come along every day. Putting $$ aside, if Ellsbury/Lester combine for that type of production over the next 6 years, I'd pretty much cream myself.

If it's true that he turned down 5/$100m from the Twins, and is looking for 7/$140m...then the Mets know what they're getting into. Seems to me that getting the Twins to bite was the Mets' biggest obstacle.

If that much is out of the way, I would think that the Mets are ready to come pretty close to those contract demands.

If he wasn't going to be a Red Sox player then this IS this is the best outcome. So it is a case of, "oh well, at least....." as far as I'm concerned.

I'd bet that Theo told Smith that once he decides to make the Mets deal, all offers are off the table. I'm pretty sure that the Mets have decided to meet or at least come very close to meeting Santana's contract demands but if they don't, I'm guessing the Sox (and Yankees) offers would not be what they were yesterday.

Based on what I've read and heard, the Yanks were completely out of the running and the Sox severely reduced their offer. Makes me realize that we really were in it just to block the Yanks. I still believe the best outcome was for us to give the Ellsbury (overrated, but will be fun to watch), Lowrie (blocked by lugo/peds), and Masterson (4th/5th ML starter) for Santana. I guess the idea of having to pay him was too much to rationally deal with. In the end, we are better off keeping him from the yanks (had he stayed in Minny). Now we have the advantage, though I truly doubt we will make the best utilization of Ellsbury because we won't use his speed and he probably bats 9th this year.

I guess...but honestly think back 6-8 months ago at the possibility of getting Santana without giving up Buchholz or Ellsbury. Every single person on this board would have jumped at it. As low as the cost got, I'm still a little disappointed we didn't close the deal. It basically would have guaranteed 4-5 straight postseason appearances and probably another title or two. Obviously this could still happen, but to see him go for scraps is disappointing.

This is an epic botch by Smith...he overthought it and stared down Theo and Cashman and lost. He lost the leverage game by waiting. They got a better return on Garza; I'd take Delmon Young's career over the potential of the four they got for Santana.

On the positive side, we still have our war chest and a ton of cash to work on replacements for Tek and Manny. Masterson will be the trade deadline bullpen "acquisition" and Lowrie will be ready if Lugo shits the bed again. And most importantly the last two months has been a free advertising period for our farm system; Lowrie and Masterson are known names now because of this fiasco.

Nothing to cry about, but it clearly seems the Sox were in it to ruin this thing for the Yanks; if they didn't step in at the Winter Meetings and get those deals on the table, he's probably a Yankee now. In that regard, well done.

It's the best possible outcome because we're keeping all of our highly touted, cost-controlled prospects, many of whom have above-average major-leaguer potential, and we can spend the $140 million we would have spent on Santana on a slugging young outfielder to replace Manny in a year or two.

Yes, the rotation would have been dominant. But with Beckett, Dice-K, Schilling, Lester, Wakefield, and Buchholz, and a solid, veteran-laden bullpen (although you can never tell about the bullpen), we're set up to have one of the best overall staffs in the league already. See the forest through the trees.

It wouldn't surprise me if the Sox are saving their cash for Holliday in 2010. If they are gonna stick with this rotation, they are going to be swimming in cash in a year or two; with all the young players in the everyday lineup as well as Buchholz and Lester in the rotation.

Manny and Tek's replacements now become top priority, and also getting Beckett's massive extension done in the relatively near future.

I am stunned that Smith didn't value the Yankees trade offer higher than this one. The Twins just lost Hunter....they just signed Morneau and Cuddyer, and could have used players who could impact 2008....Phil Hughes and Melky is not better than this bunch from the Mets? Just one year ago, Hughes was the consensus #1 pitching prospect in baseball.....A "Can't Miss" prospect....I also think both the Red Sox deals centered around Lester and Ellsbury were better....what is Smith doing?

Out of curiosity, what makes you say Holliday?

Holliday career splits away from Colorado: .273/.333/.448/.781

He has improved each year on the road:
2004 .240/.287/.367/.654
2005 .256/.313/.416/.729
2006 .280/.333/.485/.818
2007 .301/.374/.485/.860

If that continues, he becomes more and more attractive. A lot can happen between now and then. Seems right now, though, like he might be one of those guys just waiting to be overpaid. His last two years' road splits have been very passable - but not at superstar $$.

The money I can see being a valid argument. Saving that $140 million could come in handy down the road especially considering Manny and Tek are on their way out. But that's just it-- Manny and Tek are on their way out, which will save us almost $30 million a year after those are off the books. Now of course, escalating arbitration salaries down the road for Youkilis, Pedroia, Ellsbury, Papelbon, etc. must be considered as well, so the financial ramifications of NOT doing a Johan Santana deal definitely play a huge role. However, lest we forget that a few months ago, everyone was willing to dump $30 million/year into a certain blue lipped 3B who didn't have nearly the year to year track record of Johan Santana.

However, it seems clear that the fact that "we're keeping all the prospects!" seems to be an equal if not bigger reason for "Sox fans to be happy about Santana to NY." (My note: This isn't directed at you MALC, or for that matter anyone in particular. It's kind of a subtle overtone I am picking up in some threads here, at SoSH, and amongst other Sox fans) Money aside, Santana >> Lester/Masterson/Lowrie or Ellsbury/Bowden/Kalish or pretty much any package the Sox were supposedly "offering." I'm fairly indifferent to him going to the NL, but for fans to claim that this was "great news for Boston" that arguably the best pitcher for the last half decade, who is still two years away from turning 30, is not coming to Boston still seems a little odd to me. Yes we saved money and Theo will have nearly a decade to make it (plus who we keep) work, but this isn't like we dodged trading the farm for Mike Hampton here.

I agree on Manny and Tek, but Beckett I see them waiting on. He has the option year, too. Why rush it?

I think it depends on how he swings. If he sprays the ball to LF than he will be worth the money. Just look at Mike Lowell and how the monster really helped his numbers this year.

This could be a record for overrated prospects traded for a stud pitcher. Guerra is terribly overrated, and Humber, well, meh to him. This package seems to have centered around Gomez. Great prospect to be sure, but the centerpiece for one of, if not the best pitcher in baseball? Man, Smith screwed this thing up badly by letting the winter meetings pass with no deal. He had Hughes, Ellsbury, Lester, Kalish, Ian Kennedy etc., all on the table.

I have a feeling this will be one of those trades talked about for decades as one of the worst ever if not THE worst ever... Smith will be long remenbered in Minny...


***Oh shoot there hasen't been anything new on this subject in the past 14 seconds! LOCK THE THREAD!!!!!

I just find it amazing how everyone in the league instantly became so forward thinking as to realize it wasnt trading for "the best pitcher in baseball" so much as trading for "only a year of the best pitcher in baseball and a window of exclusive negotiating rights." The thinking of league execs has swung around to overvalue pre-arb players and prospects suddenly... that's pretty crazy how that happened so quickly.

This is a bad trade for the Twins, though, any way you cut it. Gomez cant hit or take a walk, Both pitchers are low ceiling crap and one of them is 25 already. Deolis Guerra has been terrible as a professional. I dont know what people see in him. Exchange FMart for Gomez and I still dont care for this package all that much. They have decent ceilings, and if any of these guys put it together they could be pretty good ballplayers, but they all have major red flags that scare you right now.

Im not sure what they were going for here. They really overplayed their hand, IMHO. They didnt like the initial offers so they tried to drag it out and hoped the offers would improve... instead they apparently got worse. Choke job.

If Geurra is still pitching at age 21 without major reconstructive surgery, I will donate $100 to the Jimmy Fund. His arm is going to fall off, and soon.

I cant imagine how Smith will sell this to the fans ... They know they could have had Hughes, and yet they wound up with Mulvey, Humber and Guerra. Blech. Its gotta suck rooting for a team run by cheapskates and retards.

Listen, no one's claiming that Johan Santana wouldn't have been welcomed with open arms. But in an ideal world you have a balance on your team of highly paid veterans and contributing youngsters. That keeps costs fairly stable, and gives you liquidity to go get, say, Matt Holliday to replace Manny.

To me, it was a win-win. The team's ratio of young to old is allowed to get younger (we saw what the ravages of age did to the Yankees last season), and along with that, our financial flexibility increases. Further, the prospects aren't blocked in AAA, and we still have a lights-out, deep pitching staff and a productive, well-balanced lineup that includes dynamic youngsters like Pedroia and Ellsbury and maybe Lowrie in the future.

The key, though, is that the Yankees didn't get him. Because of the contending teams in the AL, they are the most desperate for proven pitching. It was their undoing last season, especially in April and May.

I really can't believe how badly Smith screwed up. If you're not going to pony up and just pay for Santana and put some pieces around him then you HAVE to get value for the best pitcher in baseball. Some how the Twins found a way to screw both of this things up in a pretty quick time period. The deals he had on the table at the end of the winter meetings and what he ended up with is shocking.

This is only good news for the Sox though. They get to keep all of their young talent, the Yankees don't get him, and he moves to the NL. Plus he will probably play against the Yankees a few times next year with the Interleague play. Short of the Sox getting him this is probably the best way it could have turned out.

I just want to take this opportunity to point out this cant all be on Smith. Terry Ryan is still in the organization and has input on deals. He shouldnt get a free ride here.


Also, they did up their offers to Santana substantially at the end. Certainly a reasonable offer(5 years, 100 million): http://www.metsblog.com/2008/01/29/buzz-sa...ar-twins-offer/

I know nothing about the prospects except what I've read.
time will tell how good a deal this was for MIN.

but as a Sox fan, I'm thrilled he's in the NL.

http://www.northjersey.com/sports/mets/14896371.html


MetsKlapisch: Yanks draw assist in giving Johan to rival Wednesday, January 30, 2008
Last Updated Wednesday January 30, 2008, PST 3:23 AM Bob Klapisch This was late Monday night, about 12 hours before the Mets would pounce upon their most dramatic trade in recent history. Twins' general manager Bill Smith, in a panic to move Johan Santana, called the Yankees and admitted surrender: Phil Hughes was no longer a prerequisite, he said. Instead, the Twins asked for Ian Kennedy, Melky Cabrera and a top prospect. Would the Yankees still be interested, Smith wondered?

The Yankees considered the idea, but only briefly and not seriously. Their passion for Santana started waning as far back as December, when Andy Pettitte announced he was returning to the Bronx. The Yankees' internal straw vote was unanimous: The Twins had waited too long. On Tuesday Yankees' GM Brian Cashman told Smith he was passing on the deal, prompting the Twins to call the Red Sox. Equally devastating news awaited. Both Jacoby Ellsbury and Jon Lester were unavailable.

That is fascinating information. There is, as far as I can imagine, five possible reasons for both effectively dropping out of the bidding:

1) Yankees and Red Sox front offices were each convinced that the other was no longer interested.

2) Each organization decided that they were not going to trade top prospects, even for arguably, the best pitcher in baseball.

3) Something about Santana's contract demands were enough to cause the two richest teams in MLB to walk away.

4) Santana made it be known through his agent that he wanted to go to the Mets and his contract demands were going to be significantly higher for any team not named the Mets.

5) Some information has come to light that caused the Yankees and the Red Sox to become concerned about Santana's longevity.


I think we can throw #5 out since the Mets were not scared off.

Option #1 could only be possible if there was collusion between the Yanks and Red Sox front offices. I just can't see that given the rivalry. The only other possibility is that the Twins told both teams that the Mets were about to take the deal down. But even if this was so there was no guarantee that either or both teams wouldn't swoop in with a better offer in the final minutes.

Option #2 while possible, seems unlikely to me since both teams WERE willing to trade top prospects for Santana at the Winter Meetings. Why would both teams suddenly reconsider? I think we can toss this out as well.

This leaves us with #3 and 4 which I think are the most likely scenarios. Perhaps Santana's agent let it be known that Santana would be asking for even more than the $20m/yr that has been reported...or perhaps for more than 6/7 years? Or maybe (option #4) the increased salary demands were only communicated to the Red Sox and Yankees front offices at Santana's request?

We read reports that he badly wanted to play in New York. He reportedly considers himself a decent hitter and is intrigued by the idea of getting some AB's. He also knows that facing the NL lineups will be exponentially less difficult that facing AL lineups, especially AL East lineups.

I think Santana, in the end, steered this trade the he wanted it to go.

The Twins got bamboozled, cheated, conned, deceived, defrauded, double-crossed, duped, fleeced, fooled, hoaxed, hoodwinked, ripped-off, robbed, scammed.....

If I was a fan of the Twins, I would revolt.

From Comments on the Twins insider: (star-tribune)

Not sure you can throw that out - the Mets are the team that signed Pedro to a long term deal - even with his well-known injury issues and given that he was older than Santana.

I wonder if the Sox' reasoning was in part due to the depth of their pitching right now with a couple of young pitchers to be added. I mean, realistically, how many more wins would Santana be likely to get over who he would be replacing? Maximum of ten wins if we had a really abysmal pitcher at the bottom of our rotation (I'm not sure how likely that is without major injuries). But offensively, we'd possibly be weaker if counting on Crisp as the CFer over a promising top-of-the-order guy. And pitching wise, if the Lester trade happened, the depth of our rotation would be affected (and with Masterson gone, less close-to-the-majors replacements available in case of injury). Trading for Santana would make our rotation ridiculously strong, but weaker if anyone got hurt.

Add to it the ramifications of the money. First off, this was a long term deal to a pitcher - something this organizaton is very hesitant to do. Secondly, it would be tying up a lot of money, plus emptying our system of a lot of the cheap talent that allows us to go out and buy high-priced stars. Third, what do we do when it comes time to extend Beckett - there's would be absolutely NO reason he shouldn't ask for a deal similar in length and money as what we had handed out to Santana. Locking 40+ million a year into two pitchers is . . . well . . . probably not smart.

With CC possibly hitting the market, it may just have made more sense to take a chance on that. That way the Sox can determine how much of a need there is to upgrade their rotation (plus, they'll have some slots open) and it wouldn't cost us our MiLB depth that may be better served boosting the offense than a strong rotation. As silly good as trading for Santana would make our rotation, it wasn't a position of weakness that we needed an upgrade to, particularly at the cost in money and prospects that could be used to fill a position of weakness. I'd much rather the Sox use their prospects to go get a power hitter and/or a top catching prospect - both of which this organization desparately need.

Oh yeah . . . and any way you look at this, Smith's indecision hurt this team. While there were arguments for and against which of the Yanks/Sox offers was better - I don't think there's any doubt that both better suited the needs of the Twins. They would have gotten a potential ace and a young starting OFer from the Yanks to help the Twins get younger and fill their holes right now, not in a year or two. From the Sox, they would have gotten an average starter (Lester) with another average starter (Masterson) for depth, and a CFer (Crisp) and IFer (Lowrie) they could use right now! Ellsbury package would have yielded them the same thing (minus a starter) and helped them improve both now and for the future. Wow - they turned down a couple of trades with potential stars involved where they could have strengthened their on-the-field product and filled positions of need. Dumb, dumb, dumb!

I think #3 is the more likely reason. For any pitcher, 7 years and then at $20 million plus makes the word "risky" seem insufficient.

I think it was a combination of things:

1) Both teams committed to young pitching

2) The 7/140 contract combined with the loss of young talent was too much to bear

3) Santana's performance in late 2007 where his HR rate jumped and he stopped throwing his slider--they are worried he could have a significant injury looming

4) Both teams knew the other was lukewarm and the Mets would ultimately get the deal done

I'm just glad its over.

Anyone see if the Vegas odds have changed yet? I'm guessing a Sox-Mets World Series is the bettor's choice right now. AZ is up there also with a Haren/Webb 1-2, but the Mets have to be favored now.

I don't think either the Yanks or the Sox were that eager to give up the players the Twins were asking for in December AND pay that contract. Pettitte re-signing altered the Yanks' thinking and I'm not sure if Boston would have even been in the hunt if the Yanks weren't.

I'm still a little surprised to see that the Sox pulled both Lester and Ellsbury off the table. Doesn't make much sense to me. Personally I'd trade both in a second for Santana. Certainly one of them, plus the other guys. There must have been something the Sox saw that they didn't like. Other then the money.

Which makes me wonder if they were in it only because the Yanks were.

I've been thinking to myself for the past couple of years that the thing I hated the most about Major League Baseball is that one day Johan Santana will no longer be a Twin. Now that that day is likely near, I've developed a thing I hate the most about Major League Baseball: Eric Gagne getting a World Series ring.

Edit - Oh yeah, and Bud Selig being in charge for 5 more years, but that's a completely different argument altogether.

Which some of us debated at great length 6-8 weeks ago...

Going by Klapisch's sources, as soon as the Sox found out the Yanks weren't in it, they pulled out completely. All along, they never wanted to give Santana the contract he was asking for and were content being used to keep the price high for the Yanks, who didn't bite.

So much for the "Theo doesn't work that way" argument many here continue to believe....

Honestly, it's a good strategy. I would hope the Yanks would do the same thing if the Sox were the ones first mentioned in it. If one team is possibly getting a player like Johan Santana to add to their team I would want to make sure the other team paid highly for it. Now other than the back pages of the NY tabloids and the subway series games, not such a big deal going to the Mets.

For all of us who fell into the "at least he's out of the AL" category, here's another sobering way of looking at it:

He started 12 games against Cleveland and Detroit in 2007. Those starts are going to be replaced with someone like Glen Perkins or Kevin Mulvey. They in fact lost him, Silva and a good young SP in Garza. The Twins, White Sox and Royals staffs are going to be pummeled by the Tribe and Tigers and effectively drive up the win totals for those two clubs.

It is going to be extremely important to win the AL East, because both those teams are going to post 93-95 wins most likely with the three pretty crappy staffs that they will each play 54-57 games against.

Going to have to beat one of those two teams to guarantee a playoff spot, and its not going to be easy.

We would probably be much better off with him on the Twins still.

Compiling a 1-8 record in the process.

Obviously, Santana leaving weakens the division overall. And had he stayed, you have to figure more likely than not that he would improve on that record in '08 just by default. But in reality, Santana did absolutely nothing to impede the success of the top two teams in that division last year, and the Red Sox did just fine. He'll be doing absolutely nothing to impede the success of those top two AL Central teams this year, either...and the Red Sox will be fine.

santana owned the yankees, last year and for a few years before that. i'm glad he's out of the frigging league.

I think the reason we pulled out and the Yankees pulled out is one thing - MONEY.

Spending that much money on a pitcher - even the best pitcher in baseball - is not a smart investment. Is it so hard to believe the Sox would walk away? They blew up the Arod deal for the same reason. They got on a plane and walked away from Dice K, only to get called back at the last second. Damon. Pedro. Every move this organization has made under John Henry has been to set a price and walk away. Is it so hard to believe we would walk away from Santana, who is past his prime and has logged a major amount of innings over the last few years, over money?

If Santana did steer himself to the Mets its b/c he found out the Sox and Yanks were not going to give him 6 or 7 years. Im sure he would have played for any of the three teams.

Also, I think it was still a mistake for the Yankees to not do this. They had they money and they could have got the deal done for Melky, Ian Kennedy and another prospect apparently(according to the Bergen record). The fact is the Twins DID like the Sox and Yanks original offers more than the Mets final offer. Its just our offers were pulled back:


http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpag...=MLB&id=489

So, I doubt Johan wanting to go to the Mets was the final determination, or even a major concern. Johan just wanted too much money.

The Yanks had the money and a greater need than us(though not as great as the Mets). They just didnt want to spend the money either. I dont think Johan is a good investment for 7 years 150 million or so but I think the Yankees really could have afforded to take the chance before we did or could.

EDIT: "past his prime" as in we've seen his best, he's declining and his periphs are going down - though he's still a great pitcher, he IS past his "prime." Youre paying him for past performance if you give him the deal he wants, not what he'll do in the future.

EDIT 2: And let me also say when we're in a pennant race and the Yanks are 5 back in August and cant make up ground Yankee fans are going to seriously, seriously regret that Cashman didnt give up Melky, Ian Kennedy and another lesser prospect for Johan friggin Santana. Stupid.

al, i think cashman has been burned too often with FA pitchers or aging fossils he traded for. the kids are a safer choice for a GM who is one more embarrassing signing away from the scrap heap.

as a fan, i hate to see the yankees paying $40M annually in luxury tax. i know they have the money. it's just embarrassing. it's like a tax levy for bad contracts. santana would have cost them $20-23M annually plux the tax. enough is enough. let's go with the kids in new york, even if it means seeing the sox raise another flag in 2008.

and frankly, baseball's better off if the sox and yanks exercise some fiscal restraint.

I don't understand. Santana is not, nor will be, an aging fossil during the entire length of the deal. I don't know how the best pitcher in baseball with no history of injuries is a safer bet than 3 rookies (one of which has a history). Granted they don't want to get burned again on another bad deal, but what are the chances that Santana is still awsome and Hughes (or Kennedy for that matter if he was indeed asked about) don't pan out? The Red Sox raising another flag in '08 could probably the final straw for Cashman.

Cashman may walk anyway so don't worry about him.

A pitcher's age is relative to his current health. Santana stopped throwing his slider for six weeks at the end of the season. Is that a red flag? He got knocked around in the first inning of three late-season games, an indication he could be having trouble getting loose in the bullpen.

If the Yanks had made the deal for Santana, people all over baseball would say it's a terrible thing for the game. And then when the $20M hurler, who went 1-8 against Detroit and Cleveland last year, fails to deliver in the playoffs, he becomes the new A-Rod.

Can't you see why a Yankee fan, even just one, might think it's better to go with the kids?

EDIT 1.) You're so wildly overstating this to the point that you've squeezed the life out of the argument. He's the best pitcher in all of baseball and he's not even thirty yet. Unless there's some serious injury waiting to happen, the guy is probably going to be a BEAST, not just good, but a BEAST for the next four or five seasons. And at that point he'll probably then just become a really good pitcher instead of a BEAST.

EDIT 2.) There is no way that deal was legitimate. No way. I strongly doubt Cashman would have walked away from Santana over those three players. I'm not going to pay much attention to most media stories surrounding the particulars of everyone's involvement for a while. They've been wrong on virtually every step of the way, so forgive me if I don't lend this rumor much credibility.