Of course it's too rich, I couldn't see the Sox or NYY giving up two front-line pitching prospects for one pitcher, given the possibility of injury to any pitcher. But if the Twins like Crisp and his 80 OPS+ over the last two years, they should love Melky, who has fewer years of service & is five years younger.

Dewan has Crisp as a +22 defensively in CF last year, Melky as -22.

That said, neither Crisp nor Cabrera is going to be the lead player in a package for Santana. Sounds like the Red Sox might be willing to part with Lester. Are the Yankees willing to put Joba on the block?

Sounds like the Red Sox might be willing to part with Lester. Are the Yankees willing to put Joba on the block?

Why would the Red Sox be willing to move a vastly inferior pitcher make the Yankees willing to give up Joba?

Sure, the Red Sox would listen if the Twins called about Johan.

A more realistic package, perhaps, would have Coco Crisp filling Minnesota’s hole in center field that free agent Torii Hunter left behind and one of two top starting prospects, Buchholz or lefty Jon Lester, entering the mix. The Sox would likely have to include at least one other proven major league talent, plus one, more likely two, other minor leaguers. The Twins are known to be high on Crisp.

To try to see what this would look like: Coco + Buchholz + Delcarmen (ML talent) + Bowden (prospect 1) + Lars (prospect 2) for 1 year of Johann. Does anyone really think that a team would pay that much? The Twins will settle for a league minimum good player, a top prospect, and a decent prospect, or they will be "stuck" with Santana.

To try to see what this would look like: Coco + Buchholz + Delcarmen (ML talent) + Bowden (prospect 1) + Lars (prospect 2) for 1 year of Johann. Does anyone really think that a team would pay that much? The Twins will settle for a league minimum good player, a top prospect, and a decent prospect, or they will be "stuck" with Santana.

Maybe the Dodgers if they lose out on Cabrera.

Is there any reason the Twins would refuse to grant a window for the new team to work out an extension? If they're trading him there's now way he'll ever be back, so it'd only make sense for them to do that so they can get more back in a trade.

Maybe Cashman should tamper without tampering.

"We have an enormous amount of money free in the budget next offseason, and we'd like to spend it on pitching. Starting pitching. Front line starting pitching. Left-handed.

Nobody in particular... but we'd be willing to spend an insane amount of money to sign them. If they're on the market. But I'm not talking about anyone in particular."

Levski would kick the tires on a romp with Anne Hathaway.

The benefit of trading for someone like Santana is that you're at least given the ability to sign a top talent. If you rely on the free agent market, the top priced players all aren't very good. When's the last time a free agent pitcher with Santana's combination of youth and talent hit the market? (other than barry zito and mike hampton, of course... *snicker*) Mussina (older, less talented)? Kevin Brown (much older)?

I read somewhere that Johan is requesting 5/125 to sign an extension with the Twins. I'd do that in a heartbeat....

5/125 seems expensive... until you compare the alternative use of that money this offseason: Torii Hunter + Scott Linebrink is roughly 5/110. Who'd you rather start building a team with?

Why would the Red Sox be willing to move a vastly inferior pitcher make the Yankees willing to give up Joba?

If I were to rank the young talent of each club, it might go: Buchholz, Hughes, Joba, Lester, Kennedy, Masterson, Bowden, Sanchez. Am I missing anybody? Not wedded to these rankings, if you can find a respected analyst who sees things differently. I'm guessing from Kevin Goldstein's comments, but I haven't seen a comprehensive list recently.

So why Joba? Because if the Yankees don't offer Cano, or Hughes, or Joba, then I don't think they'll be able to top the Red Sox package. Melky plus Kennedy? Eh. Two serviceable players, but zero star potential. Lester at least has a chance...

I read somewhere that Johan is requesting 5/125 to sign an extension with the Twins.

The comment I saw in the Minneapolis paper simply referenced Zito's contract. Not sure whether it was intended to be $126M/5yr or $126M/7yr. Even over 5 years it doesn't seem unreasonable in an environment that pays Meche, Suppan, and Silva eight-figure annual salaries.

Re #6: Larry, do you think Cashman even has to say it in order to have said it?

I read somewhere that Johan is requesting 5/125 to sign an extension with the Twins. I'd do that in a heartbeat....

Where did you read that? I read in the Minnesota newspaper that said he countered the 5/93 offer from the Twins with a 126 million dollar. The paper didn't state how many years that money was to be spread over.

Been saying the same thing to Robinred (I think): if I know the Yanks have at least $40MM+ coming off the books after 2008 ($17MM for Giambi, $11MM for Mussina, $10MM for Pavano and $5MM for Farnsworth) believe me, Johan Santana's people know this.

(and depending on whether Pettitte hitches up for only one year or if Abreu is not resigned, the Yanks could have a lot more money to spend).

125/5? Jesus they'd better sign that if it's on offer ...

the Yanks have at least $40MM+ coming off the books after 2008

The Red Sox also have more than enough payroll room to compete, and I don't imagine they'll be the only two teams in the bidding. I don't see any problem with $125M/5yr on Santana. Who else would you rather have?

the Yanks have at least $40MM+ coming off the books after 2008

How much of that money coming off the books will be going to players on the roster as their salaries rise? You also have to replace the players that are becoming free agents. The Mets have about 50 million in expiring contract.

I don't think that matters much. Lots of teams have the money to pay Santana.

Melky plus Kennedy? Eh. Two serviceable players, but zero star potential.

People forget just how young Melky is. On his comp list are 3 HoFers (Clemente, Heilmann, and Carey), and several other guys who reasonably could be considered to be "stars" (Chet Lemon, Carlos May).

On my list of untradeables would be Clay and Jacoby, but just about everyone else is fair game (I'd keep Lowrie for SS insurance).

People forget just how young Melky is.

Good point. I question B-R's procedure for finding comps, but even the BP methodology paints a brighter picture than I made it seem. It wouldn't be surprising for him to add 30 points of batting average and double his home run power over the next couple years. (Though in the process, it might slow him down enough to push him out of CF.) Melky may have greater offensive upside than Ellsbury.

On my list of untradeables would be Clay and Jacoby

Hard for me to imagine the Red Sox putting together the winning package without one of these two in it, just as it is hard to imagine the Yankees winning without Joba or Hughes. I just don't see enough high-level talent left in either system to pull it out.

The $40+ mil coming off the Yankees books is Pavano, Mussina, Giambi. There's also Abreu's $16 mil and Farnsworth's $5.5. Jeter, Damon, Jorge, Matsui, Molina, Mariano are all signed. They've got a lot of youngsters--the 3 starters, Melky, Cano. Is Wang eligible? Otherwise, I don't see much in the line of internal salary pressure.

I'm ready for the phrase "kick the tires" to be officially retired. As Kramer once said, "It's played, Jerry. It's played!"

If Melky's D really is that bad, what are the odds at such a young age he could improve enough to become a plus defender.

If Santana would sign for 125/5, I'd pull a hamstring running to do that deal

If Melky's D really is that bad, what are the odds at such a young age he could improve enough to become a plus defender.

PMR and Dewan think it's bad, ZR, RZR, and UZR think it's good. Most Yankee fans think it's good. Several other fans think it's not very good. It all depends on what numbers you are comfortable with and your own impressions of his defense.

Me, I think he's pretty good out there.

Am I the only one who would give up more for Bedard than Santana?

#25: I'd be surprised if you weren't.

Why would you want to give up more for Bedard?

yes. There are reasons to want pitchers with less wear and tear, but santana has not faltered; nor has he been asked to pitch many 115+ games. Bedard has had 80% of one great season, and part of the reason that he has fewer innings is that he didnt throw strikes for his first several seasons. Now, if you're Boston and putting together enough of a packages to get santana would cripple the farm system, I could see some hesitation, but for a neutral team, he's clearly worth considerably more.

When's Bedard eligible for FA?

Bedard has just over three years of service time, according to mlb4u.com.

EDIT: I believe that means he's arb-eligible for three two more years?

Bedard won't be a free agent until after the 2009 season.

Reasons why I'd be take Bedard over Santana if it would take the same package to get either.

1) Bedard is further away from free agency and more likely to sign an extension IMO.
2) Santana is due 13.3 million nect season whereas Bedard will probably make less than 20 million over the next two seasons, assuming he gets the same in arbitration as Carlos Zambrano did.
3) Bedard's K/9 in 2007 was better than what Santana posted in 2006 or 2007.
4) Santana gives up more homers.
5) Bedard's FIP ERA the last two seasons is basically the same as Santana's.
6) Bedard would be cheaper to sign long-term in my opinion.

I'm a little concerned with the spike in Santana's HR/9. I know these things fluctuate year to year but sometimes these spikes do mean more than just random fluctuation.

Is that why you'd give up more for Bedard than for Santana, Russlan? The extra arb-eligible years? You don't see a significant talent difference?

Of course, I'd think the Twins would be more willing to deal Santana than the O's would be to deal Bedard.

OT, I editted my post to explain the reasons why I'd want Bedard first. Plus, as I gotta support my fellow Canuck!

You are changing your position a little, Russlan. You started by saying you'd give up more for Bedard.

Of course, I'd think the Twins would be more willing to deal Santana than the O's would be to deal Bedard.

I'm not sure how likely a Santana trade is, but all signs out of Baltimore are that Bedard is almost definitely going to be moved this offseason.

I don't think I changed my position. Saying I'd prefer Bedard to Santana at the same price means I value him more and thus would give up more.

I'm not saying I'd give up an additional stud prospect for him as I don't like him that much more than Santana.

Santana has outperformed his FIP every year since 2003 and has posted double digit negative hit deltas (as per baseballprospectus) the last four seasons. Since we know for a fact that BABIP is a repeatable skill projecting a league average BABIP for Santana is dogmatic and will result in undervaluing his future contributions.

Bedard, on the other hand, is all over the map. I don't think we can have confidence one way or the other so a league average BABIP may be reasonable.

Either way Santana is clearly better and more certain and that's without considering the fact that Bedard didn't finish the season. Whoever wins the Santana sweepstakes this season is the big winner of the offseason

Whoever wins the Santana sweepstakes this season is the big winner of the offseason

That clearly depends on the price doesn't it? I could easily see the Dodgers aquiring him and an expensive FA CF and make their team worse at the same time.

#37: OK, so you're saying you'd give up more for Bedard...but would pay the same price for Santana. Or something. I guess.

Anyway...

1) MacPhail admitted for the record that the O's aren't going anywhere anytime soon. I have no idea why that would lead anyone to believe that Bedard wants to stick around for a mutliyear rebuilding effort. EDIT: Yes, MacPhail also says that he's exploring what it would take to extend Bedard before looking at a trade. He's also made no secret of listening to offers for Bedard.

2) Earlier this year, Carlos Zambrano signed a one-year deal for $12MM, then just a few months later he was extended for 5/95. If we just use Zambrano's 2007 figure for Bedard, as you suggested, that's more than $20MM for the next two years.

3-4) Bedard struggles to finish seasons, not to mention stay in games. He'll rack up huge pitch counts, sometimes with lots of strikeouts, and will have to be lifted before the sixth inning. Suppressing HR may be the only thing Bedard does better than Santana.

5) I'll take your word for it. It looks like someone else covered this point better than I could have.

6) Yes, Santana would be more expensive because, well, because he's better.

How much mony did Mike Lowell leave on the table? I forget.

Torii was offered 3 for $45 and got an extra $35. Santana offered 5 for $93 and wants an extra $32. Whatever happened to loyalty? If not for Lowell, I'd say, "to what?"

Correction: Zambrano was extended for 5/91+.

How does Bedard spending the end of the season on the DL work into your valuation of him? Santana's been consistently GREAT and healthy for 4+ years. I'd be willing to pay the extra his contract is going to cost (and that will be substantial) for that type of quality and reliability.

I wonder if Kemp, Broxton, and Kershaw would be enough to land Santana or Bedard. Last week, Jeff Zrebiec wrote that his "source" told him those were players being discussed in a Bedard deal.

I'd think the Twins would take that package for Santana.

How much mony did Mike Lowell leave on the table? I forget.

Likely less than $15M (though no specifics were ever mentioned AFAIK). The Red Sox deal is one year shorter than what the Phillies were rumored to have offered him, but presumably the annualized figures were similar.

Whatever happened to loyalty?

It is a lot easier to be loyal to a winning ballclub than to one that finished under .500... Red Sox fans have seen this from both ends. Besides, Zambrano's contract already reflects "loyalty" and Santana is a MUCH better pitcher. Why should Santana's loyalty be greater than Zambrano's?

Saying I'd prefer Bedard to Santana at the same price...

I'm not quite with Russian on this one. At the same price, I'd go for Santana. But isn't that a moot point? The price for Bedard is likely to be MUCH lower. From the Red Sox perspective, better to get Bedard in a deal headed by Lester and Crisp than to get Santana in a deal headed by Buchholz and Ellsbury. (Besides, Bedard has become a "neutral" pitcher. Santana's fly-ball tendencies might not play as well in Fenway as in another park.)

In my opinion it wouldn't take a deal that included both Ellsbury and Buchholtz to get Santana. On talent alone Ellsbury, Lester, Bowden is more than enough. The problem the Red Sox face is that if the Twins want position players they don't have enough even if they trade their entire farm system.

OT, there seems to be some misunderstanding between me and you.

To clear things up:

1) If I offered a package to the Orioles for Bedard and the same one to the Twins for Santana, and they both agreed, I'd take Bedard. If I had to, I'd pay a little more for Bedard.

2) Zambrano made 19 million in his last two years of arbitration (6.5 in 2006, 12.5 in 2007). Assuming Bedard as comparable to Z, he should get roughly 20 million in the next two years.

Russlan, I think we understand each other, but we simply don't agree on your overall point. I don't believe you shown that Bedard is more valuable than Santana.

To be fair (I think), the Bedard-Zambrano comparison may not be the one you want, as it's not clear (to me) that Bedard is the better pitcher. I mention that to say that you may be right about Bedard getting less in arb. He's just not been as good as Z or Santana.

Let me put it this way: I think people will be (at least) mildly surprised if Bedard strings together two or three more years like his 2007. Santana is pretty much expected be a fixture in the conversation for CY awards. These two pitchers are not closely comparable in value, even with the contract difference.

Hey, look, I'd love to see Bedard yield the same trade package as Santana would. Believe me.

On talent alone Ellsbury, Lester, Bowden is more than enough. The problem the Red Sox face is that if the Twins want position players they don't have enough even if they trade their entire farm system.

Maybe you have a higher opinion of Lester than I do, but I don't think that's nearly enough. I don't think he'll be on the Yankees or Red Sox if the Twins aren't getting back Chamberlain, Hughes, Cano, or Buccholz as the center piece. Although I'm still praying they like Wang, and would be interested in a deal centered around him and Kennedy with another player or prospect thrown in.

I also wouldn't give up nearly as much for Bedard either. If you're going to trade top young talent for a player, you should be getting someone that can dominate and has shown they can handle an entire major league season.