Santana gone

The agent for Johan Santana has told the Yankees, Red Sox and other teams interested in Twins star pitcher that the price to sign him is a minimum of seven years at $20 million per year, for a total of $140 million guaranteed.

 

The Twins definitely will not meet that price. The Twins did offer Santana his $13.25 million salary for 2008 and four more years for a total of $80 million. The question is, will other clubs pay Santana's price?

 

Furthermore, the Twins have given up on signing free agent pitcher Carlos Silva, who is looking for a four-year contract calling for $10 million per year.

http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/12493231.html

 

 

 

 

Edited December 15, 200718 yr by Linnwood

that's only 2 million more than Torri, I'm surprised he isn't demanding more given he's the best in baseball.

I'd like the sox to sign him at that price.

I'd like the sox to sign him at that price.

 

Yep. I agree. He's worth it.

 

That price doesn't seem all the ridiculous to me.

That price doesn't seem all the ridiculous to me.

 

Compare that to Clemens' $1 million per game average and it seems like a bargain. The caveat here though is that you have to pry him loose from the Twins before you can sign him.

Yep. I agree. He's worth it.

 

No pitcher is worth a 7 year deal. Look at the history of those long term deals, I can't think of any that have worked out. I have no problem offering 25 mil for 4 years but I would never sign a pitcher for more than 4 years.

If we can get that down to 5 years I would do that in a heartbeat. Then again so would everyone else. Nice planning by his agent I think here. Someone will bite.

No pitcher is worth a 7 year deal. Look at the history of those long term deals, I can't think of any that have worked out. I have no problem offering 25 mil for 4 years but I would never sign a pitcher for more than 4 years.

 

Normally, I'd agree with you. But Santana is something special. He's still young and already a very accomplished pitcher.

Twins and Yanks talking again.

No pitcher is worth a 7 year deal. Look at the history of those long term deals, I can't think of any that have worked out. I have no problem offering 25 mil for 4 years but I would never sign a pitcher for more than 4 years.

So you would go $100 mil for four and not $140 mil for seven? Those last three are costing you less than $14 per year. I'm with that esteemed baseball analyst YAS on this one. I also think the top offer at 7 years would be $17 to $18 per not $20.

So you would go $100 mil for four and not $140 mil for seven? Those last three are costing you less than $14 per year. I'm with that esteemed baseball analyst YAS on this one. I also think the top offer at 7 years would be $17 to $18 per not $20.

 

There are exceptions to every rule. Johan Santana is THE exception to the no long term contracts for pitchers rule. I don't think I'd offer that to any other pitcher in the game.

That is a great deal for the team that gets him. He would be 36 at the end of the contract.

 

Just think of how high the average contract would be near the end of his deal. What was the average contract 5-7 years ago?

The Twins would be foolish not to trade Johan this offseason... unless they truly thought they would have a shot at going all the way this year. But im sure they have realized that the chance of that happening in this division are slim to none. But if the Yankees or Red Sox don't up the antee on Santana i can very well see him staying a Twin at least until the ASB.

 

7 years at 20 mill/ season would be a steal for him. But Reiny HATES giving pitchers long term contracts.. So i wouldn't expect him to come here. Its okay though, we still have Gavin Floyd!!!

Normally, I'd agree with you. But Santana is something special. He's still young and already a very accomplished pitcher.

 

People said the same thing about Denny Neagle, Mike Hampton, Kevin Brown, Alex Fernandez....

 

I'm not saying he isn't the best just that the odds of him actually staying healthy for even half the contract isn't good. since you will only be able to insure half of it, that will be a major drain on any budget.

 

People said the same thing about Denny Neagle, Mike Hampton, Kevin Brown, Alex Fernandez....

 

I'm not saying he isn't the best just that the odds of him actually staying healthy for even half the contract isn't good. since you will only be able to insure half of it, that will be a major drain on any budget.

Those guys had nowhere near the success that Santana has had so far. You can't base it on health alone, in that case, everyone would only sign one year deals. He has the same chance of injury every year.

Those guys had nowhere near the success that Santana has had so far. You can't base it on health alone, in that case, everyone would only sign one year deals. He has the same chance of injury every year.

 

Your second point isn't completely valid, unless I'm reading it wrong. Santana does have a healthier motion, so he's less prone to get injured. However, there's pitchers (Wood and Prior) that had motions that are much more prone to injury; thus, their chances of injury were greater.

People said the same thing about Denny Neagle, Mike Hampton, Kevin Brown, Alex Fernandez....

 

I'm not saying he isn't the best just that the odds of him actually staying healthy for even half the contract isn't good. since you will only be able to insure half of it, that will be a major drain on any budget.

 

A totally safe budget, without any drains, will net you last place in your division.

 

But I know some would cry this October if they thought we won a World Series with Hunter and his terrible contract, or Rowand, or any of the others. Fourth place and "good contracts" W00t

People said the same thing about Denny Neagle, Mike Hampton, Kevin Brown, Alex Fernandez....

 

I'm not saying he isn't the best just that the odds of him actually staying healthy for even half the contract isn't good. since you will only be able to insure half of it, that will be a major drain on any budget.

 

Here's what I'd do. I'd offer him a choice. 7 years at $20M per or 3 years at $80M total. That would give him a chance to hit the free agent market again at the age of 31. However, if he agreed to either offer, I'd sign him.

Those guys had nowhere near the success that Santana has had so far. You can't base it on health alone, in that case, everyone would only sign one year deals. He has the same chance of injury every year.

 

All of them had varying degrees of success especially Kevin Brown. However, talent isn't the point, the point is the odds of any pitcher staying healthy over the length of a contract that long isn't great. Too much of a chance.

 

A totally safe budget, without any drains, will net you last place in your division.

 

But I know some would cry this October if they thought we won a World Series with Hunter and his terrible contract, or Rowand, or any of the others. Fourth place and "good contracts" W00t

 

I would disagree with that. Listening to most people on this board, we are going to have the second highest payroll in the division and we are assured of last place this year. Look at the teams of recent vintage in the playoffs. Many low budget teams.

 

It's not how much you spend but it's spending enough and spending it WISELY. I don't think a 7 year contract for any pitcher is wise.

 

I understand the wanting to get the best players at any cost. But it's just my bias from working with players and injuries.

Those guys had nowhere near the success that Santana has had so far. You can't base it on health alone, in that case, everyone would only sign one year deals. He has the same chance of injury every year.

 

Not as he gets older and continues to pile on the 200 innings per year. Every pitcher 's should will degenerate and as you get older it will not heal as well. Good mechanics or not the shoulder and elbow take a beating. He doesn't have the same chance every year it increases exponentially every year. That's why I say 4 years max because no one will go year to year.

I'd take a chance on him in a heartbeat for that contract. It's usually an awful idea to hand out that big of a contract but Santana is the best pitcher in baseball and he's a guy I'd take a huge risk on, and obviously this would be one.

I wouldn't blink at giving him 20 million a year, hell that might be a bargin with the direction this market is going. The problem is 7 years, giving any pitcher a 7 year contract really goes beyond the "high risk" category and towards irresponsible.

I thought Santana showed some significant signs of slowing down last year in terms of homers allowed and velocity. Not that it matters with the Sox, as they have zero chance of acquiring him in a trade, and if Santana did become a FA, there's no way we'd outbid everyone.