Paying the price for Santana
-
- November
- 28
Johan Santana was 15-13 last year for the Twins. An average year for a well-above average pitcher. In the four seasons he’s been a full-time starter, his average year is 17-7, not just well above average, but pretty damn good.
We’re talking stud pitcher. But, is that record worth the $13 million he got from Minnesota last year? Especially considering Oakland spent $2.25 million for Dan Haren to go 15-9?
There are plenty of ways to look at what the cost to the Mets might be for Santana. Not all completely right or wrong. That’s just one of them.
Haren’s body of work is far less than Santana’s, but both pitched for weak offenses. Both the Mets and Yankees figure to score more, and assuming both pitch well, they should have better records.
However, there is no accounting for the league adjustment (although there’s a greater dropoff going from the NL to the AL). There’s also no projecting injury, which is the reason few pitchers get more than four or five years, and with Santana we’re starting at six.
Let’s assume three prospects for starters. Eventually, that could turn out to be three roster spots at reasonable salaries. Eventually, you’ll have to replace those players.
For a team such as the Mets, factoring in potential losses next year of Pedro Martinez, Orlando Hernandez, Carlos Delgado and Moises Alou, that’s four players who must be replaced.
Assuming you give up one or two pitching prospects and an outfield prospect, you’ll have to look at pricey free agents because your farm system is depleted.
Keeping your prospects and salary structure in line puts you in a better position down the road. Giving up a lot for Santana might make you a heavy favorite once every five games, but what about the other four? And, please don’t say anything you get Santana for October because if you fall apart in other areas you won’t see the playoffs.
Theoretically, you should pay less both in prospects and money for Haren, or for that matter, Erik Bedard, which should be the way to go. Post your thoughts here and vote in a new poll on whether the Santana price is too high.
This entry was posted
on Wednesday, November 28th, 2007 at 1:50 pm by John Delcos.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Print This Post
| 
I agree with not mortgaging the future for Santana and that Haren or Bedard would be good alternatives assuming you do not have to equally bankrupt your farm systems. Plan on losing at least one outfield prospect, or, maybe even Chavez, and, atleast one pitching prospect along with someone like Heilman. Since Heilman really wants to start and that is not going to happen with the Mets, it would eliminate a potential problem down the road. It also would not hurt the Mets to get a catching prospect to fill an already depleted system. Finally, it looks like Anderson Hernandez in not part of the Met’s future and has drawn interest in the past. It may be time to move him before he is completely devalued.
To Stillsane (RE: Mortgaging the future): You’re right about A-Hernandez. Might has well get something for him while you can. Giving Luis Castillo four years pretty much tells you all you need to know about their thinking on Hernandez.
And, Heilman, too. If he doesn’t want to be here let him go. That’s why I’d like to see them get bullpen help soon so it opens the door to a Heilman deal.-JD
I heard Darling say that he thinks Santana is a better more consistent pitcher than Haren. I hear what you are saying about cost, but better is better.
From reading the papers it doesn’t look like we will be able to land Santana anyway so I think Omar needs to talk to the three teams about what they want for their pitchers and go with the one that will dance.
On Andy – I do not think he can hit. At least he hasn’t shown he can. So if someone will take him in a package I have no issues with that.
It’s easy to simply state “better is better” and then say you want the better pitcher. Obviously, in a vacuum, or in a draft where all players were available, you would choose Santana over Haren. However, this is not the case and the decision as to who the Mets should be targeting is a complex one. This post got kind of long, so if you want the short version, skip to the last paragraph.
We all know Santana is better than Haren. You could argue he is the best pitcher in all of baseball (an argument you would probably win), but is the value he could provide the Mets significantly more than what Haren could provide? Remember, we’re projecting how both will perform from here on out. As JD stated he averages 17-7 per year. Rounding down, Haren has averaged 14-11 over the past 3 seasons. Now 3 wins is nothing to scoff at, as we saw, one extra win would have earned the Mets a playoff berth, and 3 extra wins would have earned them a playoff berth by 1 game.
However, the reality is that Haren is younger and still on the upside of his career, about to enter his prime, while Santana is currently in his prime. Who knows how long his prime will last, but it should be mentioned Johan does have an injury history where Haren, to my knowledge, has none.
Now to the crucial aspect of this decision. The Mets do not have unlimited resources, no team does (despite what you may believe about the Yankees, they too have a tipping point… we just don’t know what that is.) In order to acquire a pitcher, the Mets will have to trade players who possess both current and future value to the franchise. Assuming Milledge, Heilman, and Pelfrey as the standard package you are dealing, as the team currently stands, your starting RF, your setup man, and your 5th starter. This is all for one pitcher. This means you will have to fill 3 holes by acquiring either pitcher. Despite what your own personal beliefs regarding how “replaceable” those 3 players are, they still need to be replaced.
From all indications I’ve read, this package alone will not get the Mets Santana. Plus, they will have to shell out serious cash to sign him long term. This reduces the team’s capabilities of filling the 3 holes opened up by the trade, and further inhibits them from improving the team in season and beyond. Trading for Haren would cost less in prospects and dollars, improving the overall flexibility to make moves at the trade deadline this season, and next offseason.
In shot, I agree with JD. The better Santana only provides a negligible upgrade over Haren when you consider what the Mets need to give up to acquire him. Haren is still an upgrade to the rotation, and also affords the team more flexibility to fill: the holes created acquiring him, to improve the team at the deadline, and to improve the team beyond ‘08.
JD,
Any chance of the Mets acquiring Blanton and Harden rather than Haren alone. I would imagine the A’s would like to keep Haren since he is signed to a palatable contract. With Blanton approaching arbitration and Harden’s value diminishing due to his injury history, he would probably prefer to deal them for a haul that could be similar/slightly larger to what he could get for Haren.
For the Mets, Blanton replaces Glavine’s innings while providing an upgrade in performance (in my opinion) and could be seen as a safer move that adds to the young core of Maine and Perez in the rotation. Harden would be a bit of a gamble (assuming he passes a physical) but the Mets could end up catching lightning in a bottle with him. I would think Peterson would be up for the challenge in trying to keep this guy on the mound.
Say the Mets sent: Milledge, Heilman, Pelfrey, Gotay and a lesser prospect like a Caleb Stewart, Mike Carp, or Carlos Muniz. That’s a MLB ready CF, 2 SP (assuming they use Heilman in the rotation), 2B (who could platoon with Ellis), and a potential late bloomer like Stewart/Carp/Muniz. Mets would still hang onto Gomez, Martinez, Mulvey, Niese, Guerra, Humber, Smith, etc.
keith – its interesting that you mention vacuum, because while i don’t necessarily disagree with you and John about Haren being the more sensible move, it seems to me you’re looking at Haren within a vacuum. If teams like the Yankees and Red Sox refuse to give up their star prospects for Santana, won’t they also be smart enough to realize Haren is a better deal? And then, (unless Beane really is just stuck on Milledge and Heilman) won’t they also have better potential packages for Haren as well? It seems just as likely that one of those teams will snag Haren and the Mets will be the only team left willing to pay the price for Santana. Its just all rather difficult to predict as long as multiple teams are looking for pitching, and unwilling to divulge exactly who theyre willing to give up for whom.
John: I beg to differ on Heilman. Unless you have someone better to replace him you should not trade him. The Mets still control him via arbitration for a couple of years and he
should not cost you more than 2-3 million this year and about the same next year. Any free agent will cost you at least that. Also if he walks as A FA he should be a type A and this will get you 2 picks. Unless another team values him as a starter and will give you premium value because he is cheap,
why on earth would you trade him.
On A Hernandez be careful if you trade him if you have no backup if Reyes gets hurt.
Keith,
I agree with you. However I still think you look at Santana first and Haren second. If it does not appear you can get Santana you make a play for Haren and close the deal if you can.
My point also goes into the post season. I think Santana is probably the superior pitcher for the next several years. Any team has a shelf life. If/When you get to the post season a dominant pitcher will prevail against all comers. Merely very good pitchers sometimes lose.
Many times in the post season the stud goes out 3 times a series and their team wins all 3. That is why you pay the price. I think this team has enough pieces to think that way. If you think the team has too many holes you take a step back.
Personally, I do not see Lastings as my current starting RF, nor do I see Pelfrey as the #5. I do see Heilman as a valuable major league asset. So of the players you mention I think of it as a valuable major league reliever + 2 high AAA pieces for possibly the best pitcher in the game today.
Dave
JD: Simple question for you….if Haren and Santana are going to cost the Mets the same in terms of prospects, who do you trade for? Do you take the sure Cy Young award winner who is not only the best pitcher in baseball but is a lefty as well? Or do you trade for the younger guy who might also turn out to be a great pitcher? Tough call. My ideal hope would be a trade for Haren and then hope that the Twins decide to keep Santana and make a run this year and let him go to FA. I know, that’s probably a pipe dream. :-(
Leetch: I know what you’re saying, and you may be right. I was just looking at it from a Mets perspective.
dave: I agree, Santana should be the first call. As for the postseason, Santana’s record has not been stellar, however I won’t be the one to make that argument. We seem to differ in our opinions of Milledge and Pelfrey, however I was just looking at the team as it stands right now. And right now, Milledge is our RF and Pelfrey is our 5th starter.
JD, you can argue that Haren was more consistent last yr based upon QS than Santana. Hence, I don’t think you can necessarily say that Haren will cost you less in terms of players. And you know Beane will use this as part of his argument to get as much as possible.
If I’m the A’s/O’s I say I should get as much as the Twins b/c Haren and Bedard won’t cost their new team as much in $ b/c they are signed for a couple yrs. Plus if I’m the A’s/O’s I play it coy b/c I don’t have to trade these guys b/c they can’t walk just yet.
I would expect these teams will wait to see what the Twins get for Santana and then will price there guys based on that and will ask for the same.
My fear is the Mets will end up w/a guy like Blanton and overpay for him. And eventhough he does eat inn, he is not a swing and miss P. Hence, his effectiveness overtime may not be sustainable.
I’d rather get L Hernandez as the inn eater and then get one of the three-Haren, Bedard, Sanatana-for lowest price.
I vote for Bedard b/c the O’s seem more likely to do something dumb and they are reported to want to dump some salary (like the marlins w/Beckett).
Hence, the Mets should pick up R Hernandez’s contract (like the Sox did w/M Lowell) as part of a deal for Bedard. It was reported that Omar did talk to the O’s at the GM meetings. And that the O’s want to dump salaries and can’t find a suitor for Tejada. And Omar did say that Estrada only added “depth” to C. So, maybe this will work out.
scoopcoop,
they may just be conflicting reports – but I read somewhere else that the O’s are not looking to dump salary. Rather, they are trying to rebuild with prospects, and are willing to eat the salary of guys like R Hernandez in a trade to get those prospects. Doesn’t really fit the Mets desires of saving the real chips to trade for pitching…
I think that the most the Mets should give to acquire a front line starter is Milledge, Heilman, Gotay. If this is not enough then just sign two of the second tier starters. In addition sign Freddy Garcia as an insurance policy.
Man, I think my new obsession is the Mets acquiring Blanton and Harden for Milledge, Heilman, Pelfrey, and Gotay
To Keith (RE: Harden): That’s an interesting question, and I don’t know the answer. Harden has an injury history, which complicates the issue. Getting two would cost you more. If the Mets just got one it would be a successful offseason. That is, if they also got some bullpen help.-JD
To Steve (RE: Santana vs. Haren): Santana would cost more in prospects, but for the sack of the argument, if the price were the same in terms of prospects I’d still go for Haren based on the following:
To Scott (RE: Heilman): I’m not sure there’s anybody the Mets can plug in right now for Heilman. But, if the right package comes along I wouldn’t hesitate to deal Heilman. He’s certainly not going to stay around here when he becomes a free agent, so get something now. Especially, if it’s something better than draft picks.-JD
wow, Some people thnk A-HerN has value!
I think Haren and Bedard should cost more than Santana since the A’s /O’s have less need to trade them in the near future.
But it is a moot point since Omar made the big trade with the brand spanking new RAYS. Pretty soon the Wilpons’ will change our name to hide us as well.
Ahern can’t hit his way out of a bag made out of tissue paper. He stinks!
JD: They can plug in Dotel for Heilman. And all he’ll cost is money.
JD: The 5 games is worth the world if they are the difference between post season play or no post season play.
As a fan I want to win. I feel no sympathy for the rich guys who use the teams as their toys. I don’t beleive the Wilpons are going broke. I also think that whatever they pay for a star they will get back in shirts, higher ratings so more ad money, Think many kids want an Estrada jersey? Well how about a Mets Santana jersey for Christmas?
Yes 5 games. If we would have had one more starter last year we wouldn’t have needed 5 more games to be in the playoffs. If we would have had even one one more average reliever we would have blown 5 less games in the 6-7th inning and would have made the playoffs.
FIVE ORE GAMES WON WOULD BE AWESOME. and the Wilpons would end up richer yet!
I want those 5 more games JD.