ZOMG!

Wait, what about the trade deadline? Waivers? This sort of thing doesn't happen in September.

Maybe in the offseason...

That's not a good deal for the Dodgers...they need bats. Kershaw and Kemp are great prospects, great deal for the Twins.

WHAT!!?!?!?!? WTF?

I can't believe this could be true from either team's perspective.

I hope it's true .... anything to keep him away from the Yanks and Red Sox.

Best Regards

John

And Santana walks after 2008. Beautiful, Ned, you've just taken the crown from Tommy's exiling Konerko and the Pedro/DeShields trade as the stupidest moves in Los Angeles history.

The Twins are looking for a young outfielder to possibly replace Torii Hunter.

Of course, not having to pay Santana should make retaining Hunter plausible. If the Twins are reconciled to not signing Johan, I like this trade from their perspective. A rotation of Liriano, Garza, Baker, Bonser and Kershaw could (could, mind you) be something special by 2009. And an outfield of Hunter, Cuddyer and Kemp ain't shabby either.

This hasn't happened yet. I'd say its a mid-level rumour. Its most likely briefly mentioned than "close to happening."

How much would Santana take to resign?

How much would Santana take to resign?

I'd say at least $20 million a season.

And Santana walks after 2008. Beautiful, Ned, you've just taken the crown from Tommy's exiling Konerko and the Pedro/DeShields trade as the stupidest moves in Los Angeles history.

Owning a player for a year makes it a lot more likely that you will have him for the next few years after that. You can negotiate with him for a whole year while no other teams can.

Look at the Zambrano contract, for example. There was so much friction between the two sides on several occasions, but they eventually put together an extension. If Zambrano was free to sign an "extension" with any other team while still playing with the Cubs, he most likely would have done so.

The Braves only traded for 1 year of Tim Hudson, but they clearly were intending to sign him to an extension when they did so.

And Santana walks after 2008. Beautiful, Ned, you've just taken the crown from Tommy's exiling Konerko and the Pedro/DeShields trade as the stupidest moves in Los Angeles history.

Perhaps there's a re-signing element to the overall deal?

So Kemp, Kershaw and 160 million for 8 years of Santana.

Perhaps there's a re-signing element to the overall deal?

The Twinks would be foolish to include such a thing. Imagine how much hate they'd get when their fans discover that they let their stud pitcher go without attempting to use the one year they have left on their current deal to negotiate another one.

So Kemp, Kershaw and 160 million for 8 years of Santana.

That would be $160M plus $9M or whatever he's making next year, for 9 years of Santana.

The Twinks would be foolish to include such a thing. Imagine how much hate they'd get when their fans discover that they let their stud pitcher go without attempting to use the one year they have left on their current deal to negotiate another one.

Not necessarily, if it allows them to sign Hunter instead of letting him walk instead. The fans know the Twins can't re-sign everyone.

The Twinks would be foolish to include such a thing.

It wouldn't be up to Minnesota I wouldn't think. If they make this deal they were leaning against signing him anyway. The haul for this trade is more than the draft pick they'd get if they simply let him walk, because no way do the Twins outbid the big money teams in general and the Yankees in particular.

That would be $160M plus $9M or whatever he's making next year, for 9 years of Santana.

You guys are assuming that he would sign an extension.
After a year of playing with Jeff Kent, I am going to guess that won't be happening.

Not so much if it allows them to sign Hunter instead of letting him walk instead.

I would have phrased that:

Not so much if it instead allows them to instead sign Hunter instead of letting him walk instead.

Instead.

I'm pretty sure that Santana did not clear waivers. So when does the next non-waiver trading period begin, anyway?

It wouldn't be up to Minnesota I wouldn't think. If they make this deal they were leaning against signing him anyway. The haul for this trade is more than the draft pick they'd get if they simply let him walk, because no way do the Twins outbid the big money teams in general and the Yankees in particular.

Not that I wouldn't be thrilled to have Johan in pinstripes, but why is it assumed he'd go there automatically? Or that New York would have interest.

Let's say that at the end of 2008, the Yankee rotation is Wang-Chamberlain-Hughes-Kennedy-Pettitte- is it a given that that the blank piece is Santana? Or given the quasi-change in philosophy, would not Alan Horne or Stephen White or Andrew Brackman be the best choice to replace Pettitte eventually?

Just sayin'

Instead of posting that comment, Larry, you should instead have posted a comment claiming that you instead knew a secret about why the Twins were trading Santana instead, instead of posting that comment.

I'm pretty sure that Santana did not clear waivers. So when does the next non-waiver trading period begin, anyway?

The day after the regular season ends for non-post-season qualifiers, and the day after they're eliminated for post-season teams.

In practice, over the past 15-20 years almost zero trades of any consequence have been executed until mid-November. Virtually always, everyone waits until the free agent market begins to sort out before pulling the trigger on any trades.

So Kemp, Kershaw and 160 million for 8 years of Santana.

That would be $160M plus $9M or whatever he's making next year, for 9 years of Santana.

And technically speaking, minus the 40 million that Kemp and Kershaw will command in their arbitration eligible years (just guessing). So then its 130...

Not that I wouldn't be thrilled to have Johan in pinstripes, but why is it assumed he'd go there automatically? Or that New York would have interest.

Let's say that at the end of 2008, the Yankee rotation is Wang-Chamberlain-Hughes-Kennedy-Pettitte- is it a given that that the blank piece is Santana? Or given the quasi-change in philosophy, would not Alan Horne or Stephen White or Andrew Brackman be the best choice to replace Pettitte eventually?

Just sayin'

It's not a sure thing that any, let alone all of those young Yankees starters will be good, let alone great. It's certain that at least one of them will be worse than Johan Santana.

Pettitte might retire after this season, and I'd guess he'll probably retire after next season if he pitches in '08. Even if he doesn't retire, I doubt he'll be anywhere near as good as Santana, and he'll be a free agent.

Taking into consideration that the Red Sox will likely be interested in Santana, because they're also certain to have a rotation slot not filled by a pitcher anywhere near as good as Johan... I don't see the Yankees NOT at least talking to Santana.

I think the big edge of the Yankees' big three youngsters isn't that it makes a Santana signing unnecessary, it's that it makes it more possible. They'll be spending well under $2 million to fill three rotation spots more effectively than they probably could spending $25 million on three mediocre veterans.

Let's say that at the end of 2008, the Yankee rotation is Wang-Chamberlain-Hughes-Kennedy-Pettitte- is it a given that that the blank piece is Santana? Or given the quasi-change in philosophy, would not Alan Horne or Stephen White or Andrew Brackman be the best choice to replace Pettitte eventually?

This assumes all three of Hughes-Chamberlain-Kennedy become rotation anchors. It could happen, but that's a best-case scenario, especially as the temptation to keep Chamberlain in the pen gets stronger given how lousy most of the Yankees middle relief options have been and how Mariano isn't getting any younger.

I wouldn't guess that the Red Sox would be high bidders, though there might be interest for similar reasons. They've got two guys over 40 in their rotation and given the dearth of free agent options this offseason that means either they'll be back or we'll see Tavarez or someone equivalent starting every 5th game for them for most of the year.

If Lowe's healthy, then a rotation Santana, Billingsley, Penny, Lowe, Loaiza/Schimdt would be pretty outstanding. The bullpen needs some help, and you'd have to play all the kids on offense (which means you don't bring Kent back). Loney, Abreu, Furcal, LaRouche on the infield, Pierre, Ethier, and Free Agent in the outfield. That'd be a really good team, a serious pennant contender. It'd be expensive, too, but the Dodgers print their own money.

I realize what I laid out was the over-the-moon best case scenario, but it bears some discussion that maybe the Yankees will have limited if any interest.

The foxsports.com rumors page cites "foxsports.com," but the link just goes to Santana's profile page, which doesn't mention the rumor.

I have a hard time putting much stock into a rumor like this that emanates this time of the year.

If I were the Twins, I think I keep Santana with Liriano coming back next year. They could win the Series with those two and some luck on offense.

Why is this dumb for the Twins? This is the top pitching prospect in baseball and a proven MLB talent with major upside.

Can anyone suggest anything better? Reasonable?

I'd like to see a truly epoch-shattering trade.

Santana for Jeter?
Santana + cash for Pujols + Reyes?

whoops, wrong thread

It's an interesting idea. Even if he were only in LA for two years, Santana would put up some sick numbers in that park.

...some sick numbers in that park.

Dodger Stadium isn't what it used to be. For many years, it had relatively short fences, a cool climate with evening winds often blowing back into the batters' faces, and generous foul territory. But the last remodel took a big bite out of that foul territory, and that changed the balance. The bb-ref park factors for 2006 were 102/102.

this rumor is a planted story from the Dodgers' brass to deflect attention from the failures and infighting of the 2007 squad.

[35] probably

Wouldn't Santana be more likely to go to the Yankees now that they have those young guys. The difference in salary isn't as big an advantage to the Yankees vs any other team plus Yankee Stadium (the one still in use) helps lefties. Also if you've got the money why not use it on the best players in baseball (ARod and Santana). They will shed and gain plenty of salaries in the upcoming years so might as well get guys who can play instead of unproven guys who might suck.

As opposed to getting some krap, "at least" they're getting Johan Santana.

Assuming no negotiating window this offer is obscene. I'm not sure I'd do LaRoche for 1 year of Johan straight up.

"Assuming no negotiating window this offer is obscene. I'm not sure I'd do LaRoche for 1 year of Johan straight up."

From which end?

everyone realizes that Johan is young, as healthy as a pitcher can be, and that the Dodgers are a team that could afford to resign him at a below FA market rate (e.g. he'd get serious bucks, but not what he'd get in a bidding war as a FA), right?

the prospect wanking on this site can be unseemly at times.

also, if i don't get to watch Johan next spring/fall, then coming to Minnesota for law school was a total bust. 2 years of Awesome in exchange for Midwestern Diploma? ugh.

In a way I hope this happens. I loved it when I hated the Dodgers, and I'd like them to be relevant enough to hate again.

Didn't this rumor start in a BTF dodgers thread?

I wouldn't think that TWINT would trade Johan until they are assured that Johanito is healthy post surgery. I also hold out the increasingly faint hope that they'll throw a OMG short year deal at him ($120/4); the PR hit they'd get for a (perceived) budget driven trade of Johan, after the fiasco that was their park financing, would seemingly dictate at least a reasonable attempt to keep him in MN.

Still, TWINT could do a lot worse than the mooted deal. Perhaps they could also pry LaRoche out of Coletti's hands?

Of course, not having to pay Santana should make retaining Hunter plausible.

If all this happens (which I highly doubt), I'd much rather they spend the Hunter money on a third baseman; I could live with a Kubel/Kemp/Cuddyer outfield, if there was someone at third who could hit the ball better than, say, me.

Tomorrow's headline:

Simers: Kent, Gonzo Preemptively Bash Santana's Attitude

Not necessarily, if it allows them to sign Hunter instead of letting him walk instead. The fans know the Twins can't re-sign everyone.

But the article expressly suggests the Twinks are planning on moving Kemp to center.

Tomorrow's headline:

Simers: Kent, Gonzo Preemptively Bash Santana's Attitude

Priceless.

No one seems to know this, but Santana has a no-trade clause.

No one seems to know this, but Santana has a no-trade clause.

Don't tell this to Michael Kay...as he said tonight that he would turn down an even up trade of Johan Santana for Joba Chamberlain.

No one seems to know this, but Santana has a no-trade clause.

In some respects that makes trade rumors more tangible because that automatically makes Santana involved in the process and provides a mechanism for him to discuss an extension with the potential buyer. Yes, I know he's not supposed to before a deal is completed because of tampering... blah, blah, blah.

That's not to say a deal is likely or anything like that, but I don't see the no trade as much of an impediment to rampant rumor mongering.

Don't tell this to Michael Kay...as he said tonight that he would turn down an even up trade of Johan Santana for Joba Chamberlain.

We've found Cashman's replacement!

According to Rotoworld, Johan Santana does not have a no-trade clause:


The club would have to consider any particularly outstanding offers, but he figures to enter his walk year in Minnesota. Unfortunately, he'll probably no longer control his own destiny since he needed to finish in the top three in the Cy Young balloting to activate his no-trade clause for 2008. At 16-14 with a 3.33 ERA, that isn't likely to happen.

Cot's Baseball Contracts says Santana gets a full no-trade if he finishes in the top three in Cy Young balloting in either 2006 or 2007. He had a limited no-trade prior to his 2006 win, too.

http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/2005/01/minnesota-twins_17.html (for those that want to check out his other contract details.)

Don't tell this to Michael Kay...as he said tonight that he would turn down an even up trade of Johan Santana for Joba Chamberlain.

You know, I think kevin and Michael Kay might actually get along. (hey kevin!)