Report: Santana to Mets

USA Today, via MLBTR:

The New York Mets have agreed to a trade for two-time Cy Young Award winner Johan Santana, giving up four prospects to acquire the left-handed ace of the Minnesota Twins, according to two high-ranking Twins officials with knowledge of the talks and a person close to Santana.

The deal is pending the Mets and Santana reaching agreement on a six- or seven-year contract extension and that Santana passes a physical; they have been granted a 48 to-72-hour window to do so. Santana has a no-trade clause that he will waive if agreement is reached on a contract extension.

The Mets paid a high price in prospects to land Santana, agreeing to send the Twins outfielder Carlos Gomez and pitchers Phil Humber, Deolis Guerra and Kevin Mulvey.

The best possible option for the Red Sox, short of landing him themselves.

121 comments… add one

  • if there was one moderator who’d beat me to this it would be Paul. By a few seconds!

    Nick-YF January 29, 2008, 4:29 pm
  • Advantage: Epstein.
    The Yankees needed a #1, the Sox already have one. Meeting Johan in the World Series is the least of either club’s worries.
    And now we get to see what Jacoby Ellsbury and Jon Lester are really capable of (whither Coco?) and YFs get to find out whether they’ve overvalued their own prospects.

    Hudson January 29, 2008, 4:33 pm
  • Jesus, Hudson, you’re on a baiting streak.

    Nick-YF January 29, 2008, 4:34 pm
  • Ha! Don’t try to scoop the newsman! ;-)
    I feel a little disappointed by the news, as I would have loved to see the potentially historic implications of a front four of Beckett-Santana-Matsuzaka-Schilling.
    On the other hand, the Sox apparently are very high on Lester, and obviously Ellsbury is a lot of fun to watch and root for, and giving either up would have been sad. The fact that the Sox get to keep those prospects while Santana leaves the league altogether (and doesn’t go to the Yankees), is something to be happy about.

    Paul SF January 29, 2008, 4:36 pm
  • Well color me the happiest MetSox fan on the block.

    FenSheaParkway January 29, 2008, 4:37 pm
  • If true, fine by me.
    Hudson, I’m surprised man, you went from being a pretty level headed regular to being nothing but a flame baiter.
    What gives?

    LocklandSF January 29, 2008, 4:42 pm
  • there’s a part of me that thinks that this prospect package, which on the surface seems inferior to the Sox’s and Yanks’ one, indicates that Johan had a strong preference to play on the Mets and told the Twins this.

    Nick-YF January 29, 2008, 4:43 pm
  • The acerbic tone of his comments aside (not sure what that’s about), I agree with Hudson (and my own earlier assertions) that the Yankees needed Santana more than they seemed to let on.
    The Mets are the clear winners here, obviously, but the Red Sox should be very happy — their rotation remains formidable, and the Yankees’ remains less so.

    Paul SF January 29, 2008, 4:44 pm
  • How’s that baiting, Nick-YF? It’s a fair observation, and entirely in line with many other observations here and elsewhere in the sports media. The Sox and Yanks decided not to offer all their top prospects in exchange for a proven ace. So now we get to see the reality play out. I happen think the Sox bets are stronger than the Yanks, though both may be kicking themselves sooner rather than later for passing up Santana.
    (But if you want baiting, try this: Seems to me some YFs are on a thin-skinned streak.)
    Back on topic: I do think this outcome presents a golden opportunity for both teams fans to face a reality check about prospects. It’s hard not to notice that those who follow the minors, and even more casual fans, have a tendency to get hyperexcited about kids coming up in the system. In a sport where proven talent is now astronomically expensive, it’s a not entirely unnatural impulse to want to project high hopes on fresh talent, and to vicariously enjoy the spectacle of these youngsters living out dreams of achieving superstardom.
    But most top prospects don’t become superstars, and I suspect this crop from both the Sox and the Yanks will be no different.
    Ellsbury, Buchholz, Lester, Kennedy, Hughes, just to name a few: It would be a surprise if more than one of these lives up to the hype in the long haul. Even though many of us want to imagine differently.

    Hudson January 29, 2008, 4:46 pm
  • I think the Yanks would’ve loved Santana. And colour me rosy, but I would love to see Hughes turn into an Andy Pettitte..
    Carlos Gomez is solid though. I don’t know about the others other than Humber, but only vaguely. Are these prospects really better than Hughes + 3 lower prospects?

    Lar January 29, 2008, 4:48 pm
  • really, Hudson, because a Sox fan (Lockland) called you out for baiting as well, and Paul wrote about the acerbic tone of your post. You’ve been doing this a lot of late. Not sure what the deal is.

    Nick-YF January 29, 2008, 4:48 pm
  • I must also say though, 6-7 year extension at 20 mil is a bit.
    I love Mussina and even last year he wasn’t so good..
    Sure, it’s after an extension, so the exact parallel isn’t there. And Moose definitely gave us a few solid years. But you get the point..
    (On a sidenote – if the market goes into a recession, how much would it affect the game? I know everyone’s been pushing up the prices, but really, it must have some effect, right?)

    Lar January 29, 2008, 4:51 pm
  • So which of the following prominent media assumptions were untrue, and which indicate the Twins settled for far less than they wanted?
    1. The Twins need at least one MLB-ready player.
    2. The Twins need a high-level pitcher to replace Santana.
    3. The Mets can’t get Santana without Jose Reyes.
    4. The Mets don’t have enough MLB-ready talent outside of Reyes to make a deal.
    My thoughts are that the media generally underestaimated the Mets’ prospects and their determination to make the deal. They were clearly the mose needy of the three teams.
    But I remain convinced that Bill Smith dithered too long, lost the Yankees, then lost the Sox’ best offer, and had to settle for the Mets offer. In which case, maybe the media weren’t wrong about the Mets, after all. Maybe they overestimated Bill Smith.

    Paul SF January 29, 2008, 4:54 pm
  • Re.: Acerbic: That’s just my style. I used to write for a lot of publications which demanded that tone; what you consider harsh I consider merely tart. But jesus, guys, this isn’t the Christian Science Monitor here. We don’t have to post in some faux-neutral style, blowing fake air-kisses at our rivals, never tweaking our main competitor. What’s the fun in rivalry if everyone has to pretend to love their brothers?
    Let’s be honest here… The fact is YFs, I don’t like your team, or the decades of your obnoxious fans lording your ringgzz over us, or the endless claims of “classiness” from a team featuring cretins ranging from George Steinbrenner to Jeff Nelson… And while I’m at it, your subway stinks, your buildings are crawling with roaches, and the B.Q.E. would be the world’s longest parking lot if it weren’t for the L.I.E.
    There, I’ve got it out of my system. For now!

    Hudson January 29, 2008, 4:56 pm
  • “indicates that Johan had a strong preference to play on the Mets”
    If that’s true, I think I might faint. (Don’t worry, I’m already sitting down.) But I agree with you – the only other thing that could explain it would be that the publicized (and on paper, more attractive) offers from both the Sox and Yanks weren’t as factual as reported. Maybe this WAS the best package that was actually offered to the Twins.

    FenSheaParkway January 29, 2008, 4:57 pm
  • I don’t think it’s a matter of pretending to like the other team. I hate the Yankees as much as anyone, and have had just as many bad experiences with jerk Yankee fans from my time growing up in Connecticut. I poke the bear perhaps the most out of all the moderators with some of my posts about the Yankees.
    But a sense of respect for the people who post here is good, and part of that is being intellectually honest with your arguments. I think the “Advantage: Epstein” was really what set that particular comment apart. That seemed needlessly reductive and inflammatory. You’re a valuable, longtime member of the community, Hud. I think you’ve actually been posting here longer than I have. But lately your posts have seemed more incendiary, beyond that line of merely tweaking the opposition.

    Paul SF January 29, 2008, 5:01 pm
  • Doesn’t it make perfect sense that Santana would rather pitch in the National League, if the money is roughly equivalent?
    His career ERA will be that much lower. And if he succeeds he’ll have the glory of bringing a title back to the Mets for the first time in a long while, whereas winning it all with Boston or New York could be viewed as merely par for the course.
    P.S. This will no doubt outrage those who suddenly can’t handle anything remotely competitive on a rivalry site, but: I forgot to add that Epstein’s advantage includes the fact that Santana on the Mets puts some pressure on Steinbrenner by creating new competition for fan and media attention.

    Hudson January 29, 2008, 5:03 pm
  • funny how yf’s (for the most part) and sf’s are both happy with the yanks hanging on to their prospects. very rarely can we both agree on one team in the rivalries course of action. this is one of those cases. congrats to the yanks and sox……i guess.

    sf rod January 29, 2008, 5:05 pm
  • Good…let’s see what Joba, Hughes and Kennedy turn into.
    Hudson:
    Advantage Theo? The Yankees showed last year that head-to-head they can beat the Sox consistantly. Yes, the Sox are the champs, no denying that, but the gap is very small in my opinion. Now that we have a bumper crop of young pitchers, chances are our pitching staff MAY be even better this year than the one that beat the Sox in the season series last year…not to mention going forward if the kids pan out, they will be in pinstripes for a long, long time.

    krueg January 29, 2008, 5:06 pm
  • a cursory look at the comments on Baseball Think Factory shows that Mets fans are in a state of bliss and Twins fans are despondent. Bill Smith is getting ripped. It’s being regarded as pretty one-sided.
    Smith may have overplayed his hand or, perhaps, the Mets were the only team truly on Santana’s wish list.

    Nick-YF January 29, 2008, 5:07 pm
  • here’s a pretty typical Mets fan reaction:
    “This might even make up for the Seaver trade!”

    Nick-YF January 29, 2008, 5:09 pm
  • // I think the “Advantage: Epstein” was really what set that particular comment apart. //
    That’s an absurdly over-sensitive position, Paul. To put it in another perspective: try your argument in another sport.
    Let’s say we hear tomorrow that Brady’s ankle really is a problem. If someone posts “Advantage: Manning,” is that out of bounds? Will I drop my kerchief and faint?
    No, it’s a fair and honest reaction, which was then fleshed out in the same post and subsequent posts.
    This is sports. There are winners and losers. Advantages and disadvantages. Good trades and bad trades. But Sox fans shouldn’t cheer the fact that now the Yankees most likely won’t have a 19/20-game winner this year?
    And as for reductive, good god — check any game or news thread over the history of this site, and they are all littered with reductive observations, including from you. Double-standards and selective hypersensitivity are not what this site should be about.

    Hudson January 29, 2008, 5:11 pm
  • Heh. That’s true. Sox fans and Yanks fans are both happy the Yanks didn’t get Santana. An odd event.
    I maintain the Yanks fans are wrong, but hey. I guess we’ll see.

    Paul SF January 29, 2008, 5:12 pm
  • Honestly, I almost think this is the best possible outcome for the Sox, *including* landing him ourselves… I know he’s JFS, but I was always a little uncomfortable about letting all that young talent go.

    Jackie (SF) January 29, 2008, 5:13 pm
  • Thank Christ that’s over with (pending a contract both parties agree to…but I doubt that holds up the works after all the other crap).
    I am actually fairly happy that everyone gets to put the young ‘uns on the field now and we see how that works.

    Devine January 29, 2008, 5:14 pm
  • “the glory of bringing a title back to the Mets”
    I just can’t stop fainting around here! Cut it out!
    I guess there is a somewhat lowered set of expectations going to the NL’s NY team; I guess I just didn’t consider that a pro athlete would conspicuously opt for lower-profile, lower-pressure settings. Someone might really feel that way, but they would rarely let on to it. In this case, we may not really know the true motivations unless the Twins say something.
    I have to say, I’ve never been more excited about 2008 than right now. All the players I wanted on the Red Sox and Mets are right where they are (pending contract extension, of course). Can we get this silly Super Bowl business over with already?

    FenSheaParkway January 29, 2008, 5:14 pm
  • Hudson you can bait all you’d like, this move is a loss for the Twins and the Twins only. The GM of the Twins gambled and lost. He went from Phil Hughes, Jacoby, etc… to a group of players that do not have anywhere near the ceilings of the players included in the Yankees or Sox offer. I will agree that the Yankees needed a #1, but in the whole scheme of things this cannot be considered a loss if you are Brian Cashman. I actually think the Yankees FO deserves a little bit of credit of sticking to their game plan and not overpaying (both in salary and in players). If we are going to give them the business for always overpaying and throwing money around like it’s on fire, then we also need to commend them for not parting with it as well. Say what you’d like but I couldn’t be any happier! (Well unless the Yankees were able to get Santana for Farnsworth straight up!)

    John - YF January 29, 2008, 5:15 pm
  • “But Sox fans shouldn’t cheer the fact that now the Yankees most likely won’t have a 19/20-game winner this year?”
    Wang 19-6 2006
    Wang 19-7 2007
    Ummmmm…..And this coming from Wang’s least enthusiastic fan.

    John - YF January 29, 2008, 5:18 pm
  • // the Sox are the champs, no denying that, but the gap is very small in my opinion. //
    You won’t get an argument from me or any other reasonable fan on that. The Sox and Yankees have been pretty much a hair’s breadth apart since the beginning of 2003.
    But in debating the Santana factors, was the question ever about who would win the season series, or even whether the Sox and Yankees would both reach the playoffs in 2008? Few would bet against them finishing 1/2 in the East with one of them snagging the wildcard, though the WC race was tenser last year than usual.
    Getting Santana was always more a matter of the postseason; this is hardly a novel observation. It’s the main reason why the Yankees needed Santana more than Boston — because Beckett has become a true ace, with major postseason credibility.
    It’s possible one of the Yankee kids fills that role for New York this year… just as it’s possible that Jacoby wins the Triple Crown and either Lester or Buchholz has a better season than Guidry in ’78. Keeping the prospects is the feelgood choice, and as I’ve said now three times, it will be very interesting to watch both teams’ gamble play out. But my money would say that the Yanks will miss Johan more than the Sox.

    Hudson January 29, 2008, 5:21 pm
  • I’m aware of Wang’s numbers. You think he’s going to repeat? I don’t.

    Hudson January 29, 2008, 5:22 pm
  • It wasn’t just the “Advantage: Epstein.”
    The additional sentence:
    “And now we get to see what Jacoby Ellsbury and Jon Lester are really capable of (whither Coco?) and YFs get to find out whether they’ve overvalued their own prospects.”
    implies that the Sox are correctly valuing their prospects and that the Yankees are over-valuing theirs.
    Putting aside that every team becomes emotionally invested in its Farm and likely over-values its own prospects to some degree, the comment was unnecessary.

    yankees76 January 29, 2008, 5:22 pm
  • Was my comment unclear? I am not high on Wang, (Go back and search the site, I am NOT a Wang fan) but to make a statement like that is silly. The Yankees have found a way to produce a 19 game winner over the past two seasons, regardless of how good you or I think he is.

    John - YF January 29, 2008, 5:26 pm
  • “It’s possible one of the Yankee kids fills that role for New York this year… just as it’s possible that Jacoby wins the Triple Crown and either Lester or Buchholz has a better season than Guidry in ’78. Keeping the prospects is the feelgood choice, and as I’ve said now three times, it will be very interesting to watch both teams’ gamble play out. But my money would say that the Yanks will miss Johan more than the Sox.”
    I would say that it is more realistic that one of the three young guns wins 20 games than the other examples you gave. Still trying to incite?

    krueg January 29, 2008, 5:26 pm
  • If the Yankees’ offer of Hughes were still on the table, I think the Twins would have taken it. If Hughes was pulled off the table, Lester became the next best available pitcher, and if reports are true that the Sox too pulled him off the table, then the Twins probably took what they felt was the best offer they could get.
    Also, it would not suprise me if any and all suggestions that Santana wanted to play in Queens/the NL were coming solely from the Twins Front Office, and not from Santana or his representatives. I think Bill Smith really over-played his hand here. Hughes and Melky plus Yankee prospects (the December offer) is superior to what he ultimately got.

    yankees76 January 29, 2008, 5:28 pm
  • // I will agree that the Yankees needed a #1, //
    … yet you complain that a Sox fan saying this out loud is “baiting.”
    I’ve got another controversial statement to make: The earth revolves around the sun. Paul can now chastise me for baiting geocentrics.

    Hudson January 29, 2008, 5:28 pm
  • It’s the manner in which you say it, that’s all. There are those that probably agree with your point, but you make it such an inflamatory way that you aren’t going to get people to side with you. I don’t like the Red Sox, but I also respect them, so when I make statements it reflects that. That’s all.

    John - YF January 29, 2008, 5:33 pm
  • Krueg, are you predicting that one of the Yankee prospects will be a 20-game winner this year? And do you really find it inflammatory to have to actually debate the merits of Cashman and Theo’s decisions?
    Such sensitive souls! Let me fix y’all a glass of warm milk and sit you down in front of the TV with the complete Don Knotts/Tim Conway movie collection, so you don’t get too agitated.

    Hudson January 29, 2008, 5:33 pm
  • I would say that it is more realistic that one of the three young guns wins 20 games
    More realistic doesn’t necessarily mean realistic. Not on the innings limitations and growing pains they are sure to experience. And I’ll bring back my Mets example: Of the Pulsipher-Isringhausen-Wilson trio of starting prospects, only one (Isringhausen) had success in the bigs, and he as a closer. The chances are good that of the Yanks’ Big Three, only one has solid success in the bigs.
    It’s why I was pushing for acquiring Santana for the Sox. Lester may become a great left-handed pitcher. Santana IS a great left-handed pitcher.

    Paul SF January 29, 2008, 5:35 pm
  • // you make it such an inflamatory way //
    “Advantage: Theo.”
    Yeah, real inflammatory.
    I mean, look at that word choice.
    Advantage — that’s incendiary stuff.
    Theo — using first names, how rude.
    Two words separated by a colon. That’s typographic code for your momma wears combat boots.
    I mean, I’ve never seen anything so outrageous. A fan said he thinks his team came out ahead!
    C’mon, get over this self-rightous, phony pique.

    Hudson January 29, 2008, 5:37 pm
  • So maybe Cash is still driving the Yankee bus.
    Looks like we’ll take what’s behind curtain A, and move from there.

    YF January 29, 2008, 5:40 pm
  • I don’t find it unlikely that one of the Yankee prospects will pitch well enough and get enough run support to win 20.
    I find it highly unlikely that one of them will toss enough ML innings/starts to reach that total.
    That being said, same for Lester or Buch.

    QuoSF January 29, 2008, 5:41 pm
  • Given the run support each club gives its pitchers, I think the following statement is noncontroversial, even obvious:
    Any of the five pitchers in question looks good enough right now to be a 20-game winner sometime in the future.
    On the other hand, the following statement is also noncontroversial, even obvious:
    Odds are good that none of the five pitchers in question ever has a 20-win season.
    Again, which is why I was rooting for Santana. His odds of producing at a high rate for the life of his contract were much better than for any rookie starter.

    Paul SF January 29, 2008, 5:49 pm
  • Olney said something interesting on the Michael Kay show. He thinks Santana going to the Mets for such a low price will lead to Cashman being fired if the Yankees fail to reach the goals that Hank has set. (Of course none of us really know what they are) Michael Kay said the opposite he thinks Santana NOT going to the Sox would be looked on as a positive in the Cashman column. Time will tell.
    I don’t see how it’s overvaluing our prospects. The Yankees made Hughes available early on, but when the situation was going nowhere they pulled him back. The Mets got Santana for nothing near what the Sox or the Yankees offered. So in hindsight giving up Hughes for Santana now seems silly. Humber, Gomez, Mulvey, etc… they aren’t on Ellsbury, Lowrie, Lester, Hughes, etc..level, not even close. So looking at it now if they had given up Hughes they would have overpaid based on what they got back in the end.
    PS – One thing I am not is phony. I am honest to a fault, so you definitely have the wrong guy.

    John - YF January 29, 2008, 5:49 pm
  • Ah yes, pitchers and catchers report soon.
    A win-win for all parties in my opinion. Yanks and Sox keep their prospects. Mets get Johan and the Twinkies do not have to worry about Johan pitching in the Dome against the Twins over the next few years.

    Rob SF January 29, 2008, 5:52 pm
  • wow, the most exciting news of the off-season and i was in a meeting! A few of my thoughts on the news and the thread:
    1. I think its overly simplistic to just say the yankees lost here and the sox won. Yes the sox have a better top pitcher right now but other than that the teams are very closely matched. Both GMs decided (correctly IMO) that the price in terms of dollars and prospects was just too high. The two teams it seems made the same exact decision. The Red Sox may be ahead in 2008 but the jury is most certainly out past that. Both teams retain their top prospects and just as importantly payroll flexibility.
    2. As YF just alluded to, it seem that Cashman is still calling the shots. There have been tons of posts around here accusing Hank of marginalizing him. This decision came down to him and he made the one he thought was best for the team over the next few years.
    3. The mets better win soon and im not sure that Santana alone will do the trick. I really dont know what Minaya is up to. The team has basically no farm system now…
    4. Id rather not get too much into the Hudson thing but your post at 4:56 pm was amazingly offensive and any one else around here typing such things would be crapped on instantly. I guess it shows your true colors. Why should anyone respect you and anything you write if you dont respect us? This site isnt about petty hate which you seem to exhibit regularly now. Your defensiveness about your posts is pretty strong and makes me think that you realize this yourself.

    sam-YF January 29, 2008, 5:54 pm
  • A 20 game winner in the AL East is quite an accomplishment, but as you say it is unlikely. But over the past two seasons the Yankees have found a way to produce just that (19). Wins also have a lot to do with luck and good offense. A better statement would be: The Yankees will be hard pressed to find a guy in that bunch they now own that can duplicate the ERA of Santana next season. (Even ERA is not a true sign of how good the pitcher season really is)

    John - YF January 29, 2008, 5:54 pm
  • It’s amazing how little the Twins got for Santana.
    They had: starting pitcher replacement (Hughes), ML-ready outfielder (Melky), good young pitching prospect (Marquez) and maybe even another prospect from the Yanks.
    They had: starting pitcher replacement (Lester), ML-ready outfielder (Crisp), ML-ready infielder (Lowrie) and a good young pitching prospect (Masterson) from the Sox. (Or an offer that included the ML-ready CF, ML-ready infielder and the pitching prospect).
    Instead, they got: Zero ML-ready talent, and lower-caliber prospects than the Yanks and Sox were offering (just more of them).
    Either the media got jobbed, or Bill Smith did.

    Paul SF January 29, 2008, 5:57 pm
  • Paul, let me extend my sympathies. Not so much at the loss of Santana (the Sox never had him!), but at the loss of this story, which you have covered and covered and covered like no other blogger on this great internet. It was there for you in the morning. It was there for you in the afternoon. It was there for you at night. It gave sustenance when there was no nourishment to be found mouldering on that hot stove. It was there for you. And now it’s gone. Gone but for a brief addenda or two when things become official, and maybe, just maybe, a few months down the road, a review of what might have been. I feel your loss. I do. There is a void now. We here in the YFSF community are here to support you during what we know must be a most difficult time. You have our sympathy. You have our love. Be strong.

    YF January 29, 2008, 5:57 pm
  • “Krueg, are you predicting that one of the Yankee prospects will be a 20-game winner this year? And do you really find it inflammatory to have to actually debate the merits of Cashman and Theo’s decisions?”
    No, but it is much more realistic than your triple-crown and Guidry ’78 reference which was obviously another jab.
    Look, you can say what you want. I come here to talk Yankees vs. Sox in a civil and mature manner. I, for one, am sick of all the bullshit that is spewed by BOTH sides and I like coming here and talking to sane Sox fans. I can’t speak for anyone else, but your post was the opposite of that. Like a pissing contest of something. I’m sure you are very proud of your Sox and they are the Champs, so what’s with the continuation of the bad attitude? Is everyone else wrong but you are right?
    I’m not a moderator, I usually read the site but don’t always post and I cannot speak to any of your other “recent” posts but this one seemed to be dripping with condescention that isn’t the norm.
    Of course, I guess I can get back to my… “glass of warm milk…complete Don Knotts/Tim Conway movie collection”

    krueg January 29, 2008, 6:00 pm
  • Maybe it’s the recency effect or fear talking, but even my most ether-and-booze-soaked fantasies don’t have the Yankees youngsters panning out as poorly as the Mets’ Golden Boys of Yore. I’d be shocked (thrilled, but shocked) if either Joba OR Hughes don’t surpass Isringhausen’s eventual success, based on what they did last year.
    I’m happy Johan is staying away from the AL East, and not just because the Mets got him. If I expect the Yankee trio to struggle, it wouldn’t be three years from now, it would be next year, which is also the year that Santana would have helped the Yankees the most.

    FenSheaParkway January 29, 2008, 6:05 pm
  • Thanks, YF. It will be difficult, but I’m glad you and the rest of the community are here for me to lean on.
    On the bright side, it had gone on so long, I was ready as anyone for it to be decided one way or the other. And now there’s only a couple weeks until pitchers/catchers!
    I predict we see a lot more hot stove news here quickly, especially if the O’s pull the trigger ons ending Bedard to Seattle.
    I think we’ll see a lot of signings and trades in the next month or so — from the Sox’ perspective, I wouldn’t be surprised to see Tavarez, Crisp, Hinske and Kielty all changing teams now (or in Kielty’s case, re-signing with the Sox if Crisp is traded).

    Paul SF January 29, 2008, 6:11 pm
  • A season without Tavarez? Say it ain’t so, Paul!

    FenSheaParkway January 29, 2008, 6:17 pm
  • I’m not sure that Hughes, Chamberlain or Kennedy will ever win 20 games, or that Chamberlain will save 40, and I am fairly sure that, barring injury, Santana could have won 20 games for the Yankees this year, but, philosophically, I’m very happy not to be trading away our prospects for Santana.
    Also, putting Lowrie and Marquez aside, while I recognize that most of the potential trade packages were still “prospects” to some extent, I think we know that Hughes, Lester, Ellsbury and Kennedy have each already had some degree of ML success (small sample size). We don’t know that any will be great, but all have demonstrated they can potentially be successful. Bucholz has thrown a no-no and Hughes almost did. Chamberlain dominated in a set-up role. Ellsbury showed a great hitting stroke and potentially game-changing speed. These guys may never make the All-Star Team, but I think a bunch of them will. We aren’t talking about a couple of double-A and single-A kids that the Twins passed on.

    yankees76 January 29, 2008, 6:43 pm
  • speaking of tavarez….he has been getting lit up in the caribbean world series. check espn deportes on the late nite.
    as a naturally biased sox fan the santana singing makes me happy. i figure johan to be worth about 10 more wins on the yankees ’07 total, which would have changed the division. but what i feared most had the yanks signed him, is a game 7 ALCS scenario where santana would tip the scale. i can sleep easier.

    sf rod January 29, 2008, 7:00 pm
  • As a Yanksfan, I am happy with this. Not because I think our prospects will turn out as good as Santana (they almost certainly won’t), but the cost would have been too steep – 2 or 3 cost effective young guys plus a $120 mill extension. I think if the prospects come close to fulfilling their potential and the Yanks spend that saved money wisely on the upcoming free agent markets (which are pretty strong, nd coioncide nicely with some bad contracts coming off the books), the Yanks will be a better team overall in the long run.

    Mark (YF) January 29, 2008, 7:01 pm
  • “10 more wins on the yankees ’07 total”
    No player in the league is worth ten wins. Santana’s worth more like 4 wins over the course of the season.

    Mark (YF) January 29, 2008, 7:04 pm
  • And just to address Hudson: it’s a little disingenuous to post something clearly meant to bait Yanks fans here, and then pooh-pooh it with “oh so sensitive!” comments.
    Since you mentioned you are a writer, surely you are not unaware (double negative, I know! I can be underhanded too!) of the passive-aggressive phrasing of your post. Beggining your post with “Advantage: Epstein” in an instance where he made no move save to stand pat and ending it with “YFs get to find out if they overvalued their own prospects” is 10th grade level goading.
    It’s also unfortunate that so many YF’s went for such sophomoric bait. It’s best just to ignore this sort of thing. And I’ll try to heed my own advice. Starting now, of course.

    Mark (YF) January 29, 2008, 7:20 pm
  • Hey Hudson, you really need to grow up. I used to enjoy reading your level-headed comments while lurking. I always thought you were one of the more rational posters here. Now, you’re just acting like a child.
    Fact is, this entire site has gone pretty downhill over the past few years.

    Nemecizer January 29, 2008, 7:42 pm
  • Wow, I could not disagree more strenuously, Nemecizer: this site is pretty much the only one I’ve found where Yankees and Sox fans can talk without it devolving (most of the time, he said with an eye on current events) into screaming within a few posts.

    Devine January 29, 2008, 8:03 pm
  • No player in the league is worth ten wins. Santana’s worth more like 4 wins over the course of the season.
    It’s not how many wins over the course of a season he’s worth… it’s how many wins he’s worth during the postseason. I think Josh Beckett reminded us all how valuable one can be.

    Atheose January 29, 2008, 8:20 pm
  • Agreed, Devine. This site is great because it’s a chance for such hated rivals to sit down and objectively discuss baseball, because Red Sox and Yankees fans are some of the most knowledgable in the game.
    By the way Nemecizer, how can you say the site has gone downhill over the past few years? This is the first time I’ve ever seen you. Not trying to bait, just genuinely curious.

    Atheose January 29, 2008, 8:35 pm
  • Thanks for the critique, Nemecizer, but care to elaborate a little? It’s interesting that you haven’t commented and only lurked, but then, as soon as the site is on the path to a nadir you decide to interject. Very strange, that tactic.
    As for the trade, I said this here a LONG time ago and before any deal went down: I thought the Twins were always going to get a lot less than anyone suspected in terms of proven or A+ level talent, and I think that it has panned out exactly that way. The Mets’ offer just isn’t, to me, that spectacular. The Twins have accepted something of a crapshoot in return for Santana. Not that Hughes, Ellsbury, et al weren’t crapshoots, but they were the best crapshoots around. I have been continually suspicious of reports about what was supposedly offered for Santana, and this trade doesn’t do much to assuage those suspicions. I think the Mets made a great deal here, considering their need at the position is far greater than the Sox (and probably the Yankees too, even with the risk that a rookie-loaded rotation poses). So the Twins traded the best pitcher in the game to the team that needed him the most for arguably the least strong of the three deals. Again, that’s if you believe that the Yankees and Red Sox actually offered what was reported, which I, for one, don’t, and haven’t. So who knows, right?

    SF January 29, 2008, 9:00 pm
  • For what its worth, Gammons said on ESPN that Santana basically issued an implicit ultimatum that the Twins make a deal by today or he would use his no-trade clause if the Twins tried to deal him later in the season.
    Hence, the Twins were forced to take the best offer available, which was from the Mets.
    ESPN also said that the Mets offer was probably only the 3rd or 4th best offer in terms of talent–after various Red Sox and Yankees offers.
    A great deal for the Mets. For Twins, not so much.
    Mets’ fans should be doing somersaults.
    Interesting that the Yankees didn’t swoop in at the last minute to trump the Mets deal. I know they like Hughes and their other young pitchers, but you are talking about Johan Santana.
    They say that sometimes the best move is the trade that you didn’t make.
    But in this case, it could be that the worst move is the trade that you didn’t make.

    SoxFan January 29, 2008, 9:03 pm
  • this entire site has gone pretty downhill over the past few years.
    Odd, considering the site is only a few years old by every possible definition of the phrase “a few.”
    So basically you’ve hated YFSF from the beginning? Awesome. Run along, then.

    Paul SF January 29, 2008, 9:10 pm
  • SoxFan -
    The Yankees are still in the rear-view on this one. Don’t think Mets fans (including me) aren’t girding themselves against the possibility that someone, somehow will botch the extension negotiations, breaking the 72 hour window, and letting a new Phil Hughes-less package take Santana to the wrong part of New York. I’m not even calling my friends until this thing is done. Heck, I’m not even letting the post-2004 Soxfan in me talk to the post-never Metsfan half right now.

    FenSheaParkway January 29, 2008, 9:45 pm
  • I cannot believe Santana was just unloaded to the NL, and most of you guys are arguing over the proper manner in which to communicate with each other.
    Yanksfan vs Soxfan should be renamed ‘Fans of both the Yanks and Sox Seeking Terminal Bliss Through Passivity’. Either that or ‘Chicks Dig Sports’
    Come on. There’s no crying in baseball.

    Dirty Water January 29, 2008, 11:17 pm
  • SF–
    I agree with your comment concerning the validity of the Yankees’ and Sox’ reported trade offers. I’ve thought that what may have been the biggest issue for the Twins concerning both the Sox and the Yankees were their unwillingness to offer Johan a contract with the years he was asking for (we will see what the Mets offer and what is accepted, if it’s accepted…at which time I think more perspective on the trade will crystalize).
    Both the Yankees and the Sox had every reason to not want to sign any pitcher to that long a contract. The Yankees, having been burned by long and large contracts, made one super-long signing of the only player in baseball that could reasonably be signed to that kind of contract (A Rod).
    The RedSox seem to have a philosophy where those kinds of long-term deals are not acceptable (Varitek may be the longest “big-deal” in memory and he’s the team’s Captain!).

    walein January 29, 2008, 11:32 pm
  • Like many of my yf brethren here, I’m happy. Santana didn’t go to the Sox, and we didn’t pay an absolutely exorbitant price to get him.
    …and BRAVO! Bill Smith. Your negotiating prowess will be studied and emulated by teams from this point on…

    The Sheriff (Andrews) January 29, 2008, 11:36 pm
  • The more I think about this, the more obvious it seems to me that neither the yankees nor the sox were ever really serious about making this trade. Given the final cost for the Mets and either team’s ability to jump in last minute, they could have got it done. Both team’s front office decided that the status quo was acceptable to them. I think for the yankees this was a financially driven non-move and I applaud them for that. I think both teams front offices will look very smart here in the end, ultimately employing the same overall strategy to the same result. (their means for executing this strategy were of course quite different)

    sam-YF January 30, 2008, 12:49 am
  • I want to cut Bill Smith some slack, since he’s not even five months into his new job, and this was his first real, big-time off-season. But that was before I saw that he’s been with the team for a while, preparing to take over for Terry Ryan, not to mention the fact that Terry Ryan still works for the team as an advisor! Don’t feel too sorry for Bill Smith though; if he gets fired, here’s how his next interview is going to go:
    “Bill Smith… say, you aren’t the same Bill Smith who ruined the Minnesota Twins for years to come, are you?”
    “Uh, no… You must be thinking of another Bill Smith. I’m the good one.”
    “Sorry, MYYY mistake!”

    FenSheaParkway January 30, 2008, 1:17 am
  • it seems to me that neither the yankees nor the sox were ever really serious about making this trade
    I think they were serious, but their seriousness was obviously dependent on timing. The Red Sox’ level of seriousness was obviously reliant upon the Yankees’ level of seriousness; otherwise, like you say Sam, they could easily have jumped in with a better offer than the Mets’. Once the Yanks were out, the Sox either were out or dropped their offer to a level the Twins were no longer interested in.
    Based on how things turned out, I think it’s safe to say both the Sox and Yanks were very interested and would have made a deal if the Twins had pulled the trigger during the winter meetings — when they should have.
    It’s very clear the Sox and Yanks were adamant about either (or both) of two things: Keeping him away from the other, and avoiding the bidding war that every GM and agent seems to think he can incite between these clubs. It looks like Epstein and Cashman managed to accomplish both by staying cool, giving reasonable offers, then refusing to budge when it became clear the Twins were trying to play them against each other. They showed Bill Smith how to build a winning ballclub. Smith showed the rest of us how to throw your franchise into oblivion for the foreseeable future.

    Paul SF January 30, 2008, 2:09 am
  • So do we all agree that this now makes the Mets the best team in the NL? I think it’s very unlikely that Johan pulls a Zito, and believe that he’s going to shred NL batters to pieces. And if Pedro is healthy this year… Pedro + Johan? That’s a pretty scary two-outta-five.

    Atheose January 30, 2008, 8:38 am
  • I dunno Paul, I think timing may have played an issue but I just wonder if either team would have actually pulled the trigger on one of those reported “offers” This is something we will likely never know. I did find this tidbit in the Globe interesting though:
    “But there was considerable doubt within Red Sox executive offices that even if they’d struck a deal, they would have been able to sign Santana.”
    This could be a little evidence of my suggested scenario…

    sam-YF January 30, 2008, 9:00 am
  • So do we all agree that this now makes the Mets the best team in the NL?
    Not sure, but according to anonymous front office sources cited on the local news this morning (CBS-2, to be exact), the Mets may now be the best team in the Majors. I find that assertion utterly ridiculous. If Bedard ends up on the Mariners one could argue that the Mariners are better than the Mets, to say nothing of the Sox, the Yankees, the Indians, the Phillies, etc. etc. The Mets pitching, once you get past Santana, is beyond unpredictable, and conceivably quite awful, they certainly overachieved for a great deal of last year – September was a (very quick) regression to a mean, at least to me. This move is a great one for the Mets, no argument – they gave up basically zilch, but it hardly catapults them that far up in the hierarchy of MLB. I wonder who those front office sources are? Jeff “I heart rotisserie baseball” Wilpon?

    SF January 30, 2008, 10:07 am
  • It certainly makes them have an even more aesthetically pleasing rotation (I’m not coming out of the closet here…not that there’s anything wrong with that.) You could be treated to Johan, Pedro and El Duque starts during a three-game series. Johan’s sheer brilliance is fun to watch. Pedro, although he is not the Pedro of old, is so intelligent that it’s joy to see him set up hitters. And El Duque is, perhaps, the most entertaining pitcher going these days. I’m psyched that I’m living in NY right now.

    Nick-YF January 30, 2008, 10:16 am
  • The Mets will get this contract done, I am pretty sure. For one, they can’t afford the PR disaster that this would be after last season’s ignominy, and two, they NEED Santana now from a baseball standpoint and to open the new stadium in 2009 from an economic standpoint. If the deal doesn’t get done it will be for one of two (longshot) reasons: the Mets try to play hardball stupidly and/or Santana makes a demand that goes far beyond a number that would make him the highest paid pitcher in the game. In other words, the Mets don’t have much of an option here, unless Santana asks for double Zito money, which isn’t realistic for him to expect. Paying him the most in the game by some margin, though? That should be what the Mets expect to do, and should be ready to offer in the end.
    Seeing that his choice is between a ton of money from the Mets and the corollary endorsement money from being in NY OR riding out a season with injury risk for a non-contending team with little collateral financial benefit in the hopes that he makes more money in free agency a year down the road, I don’t see Santana asking for money that kills a deal. And I don’t see the Mets wanting to touch the PR nightmare that losing out on Santana would be. Both sides need each other, which is a recipe for a deal getting done.

    SF January 30, 2008, 10:17 am
  • Agreed. This deal is going to get done for the reasons SF state. But in addition, I get that feeling looking at the prospect package the Mets sent along. I don’t see them having any ambivalence about what they had to give up and I thus I don’t anticipate anyone in the Mets F.O. feeling okay about a deal falling through. This is to good an opportunity. The press says, the fans think it, basically every prospect maven thinks it.

    Nick-YF January 30, 2008, 10:24 am
  • The Mets could bring El Tiante out of retirement, Nick.
    The Mets’ rotation is Johan Santana, an erratic underachiever (Perez, whose August and September were terrible), an overachiever (Maine), and two massive injury risks (Pedro, El Duque) who are also well past their prime. Their #6 is an overrated prospect (Mike Pelfrey) who showed no stomach for the majors last year. What’s that term that we love around here? House of cards?
    Who knows what April will bring, these guys could round into great shape, Maine could contine to excel, Perez could somehow become consistent, Pedro could throw 165 innings+, I don’t know. If I were a Mets fan, I’d be thrilled about getting Johan, but I’d also be begging Omar to find more help.

    SF January 30, 2008, 10:26 am
  • I think Maine is solid–someone who is definitely a #3 and has the ability to be a #2. Perhaps, I’m higher on him than most, but I think he’s what he showed he was last season.
    But overall, your assessment of the rotation is about right.

    Nick-YF January 30, 2008, 10:30 am
  • How long until someone (not me!) types this?
    “The Yankees got screwed by the schedule-maker. They have to face the Mets six times next year while the Sox face the Mets not once. That’s probably two starts by the best pitcher in the world that the Sox avoid. It’s completely unfair.”

    SF January 30, 2008, 10:32 am
  • Just to show how far the Yanks were out of it at the end, a package of Horne, Betances, AJax, and Marquez could have netted Johan Santana.
    Crazy.

    A YF January 30, 2008, 10:41 am
  • Who do the Sox consistently get, as a natural rival, instead of the Mets? Is it the Braves?

    A YF January 30, 2008, 10:44 am
  • some interesting info from Bob Klapsich:
    “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.
    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.”
    If this is true, I stick to my guns that the decision, at least for the yankees, was primarily based on money…

    sam-YF January 30, 2008, 10:44 am
  • I think money was a big part of the decision-making for both teams, frankly. But for the Yanks, Hal basically nixed adding 20mil for 2008 two months ago.
    Smith’s backup plan seemed to involve moving Santana mid-season when he could drum up interest again. Seems like he had that rug pulled from under him with no room left to maneuver.

    A YF January 30, 2008, 10:51 am
  • link to above article…
    http://tinyurl.com/2nsb65

    sam-YF January 30, 2008, 10:51 am
  • I had a drink (or 3) with BP’s Jay Jaffe last night, and I don’t think it would be breaking any confidences to report that his thoughts re this trade essentially line up with those of my esteemed coblogger, SF, those being:
    -it’s a great deal for the mets, who needed it
    -it’s a lousy deal for the twins.
    -reports as to what was and was not on the table from the yanks and sox have likely been wildly exaggerated.
    and even with this addition, i will note that he remains on the fence about the mets, and enthusiastic about atlanta.

    YF January 30, 2008, 11:06 am
  • The Sox’ “natural” rivals are the Braves, who may still be the better team in the NL East next season.
    I do not believe the Sox and Yanks offers, as generally reported, were exaggerated. I do believe both teams grew more and more comfortable in the knowledge that they didn’t need Santana, and they knew their rival didn’t need him either.
    Smith bungled himself out of any kind of respectable deal.

    Paul SF January 30, 2008, 11:30 am
  • I would be surprised if Smith, going back to the Yanks with a “sans-Hughes” deal, couldn’t have made the trade. Money or not we would have heard more about it becaus the Yankees would have HAD to re-consider the situation once again.
    Unless Hank is so emotionally unstable that his voice-mail message ending with “Bill you are dead to me” was taken seriously.

    walein January 30, 2008, 11:34 am
  • Funniest description of the Santana trade negotiations that I have read, from the USS Mariner blog:
    “et_blankenship Says:
    Wow. Did the Twins overplay their hand or what? It’s a 2-step process:
    1) Get the Yanks and Sox to bid against each other.
    2) Accept the best offer.
    How the Twins managed the more difficult step 1 but failed to perform step 2 is amazing. It’s like getting two Swedish supermodels to fight over your naked body . . . and then going flaccid.”

    SoxFan January 30, 2008, 11:47 am
  • I too am of the idea that the Twins were never going to deal Johan to the Sox or the Yanks. They wanted him out of their league, and not coming back to Minn every couple months pitching in a different, much better, uniform.
    Good for eveyone involved, incluiding New York. Good for both New York and Boston for not getting fleeced into doing something that they might have regretted. You can’t miss what you never had with regards to Johan, but you sure can feel bad watching greatness in another system when it used to be in yours. I think this holds true for both of our respective organizations. It was a LOT of cash, a LOT of talent and a lot of years to live with a potential mistake.

    Brad January 30, 2008, 12:33 pm
  • I can’t see how the Braves (or Phillies, even) can be considered ahead of the Mets now.

    A YF January 30, 2008, 12:43 pm
  • I also can’t see how Smith bungled anything if Santana stepped in and changed the understanding. If Smith was planning to deal Santana by July but now Johan said he would only accept a deal before the season, then that’s hardly Smith’s fault. It all depends on what Santana said and when he said it. Smith’s leverage was always constrained by what Santana wanted.

    A YF January 30, 2008, 12:49 pm
  • Eric Bedard traded to the Mariners…
    Anyone else hearing this??

    LocklandSF January 30, 2008, 1:10 pm
  • Bedard to M’s: That’s the rumor.

    attackgerbil January 30, 2008, 1:34 pm
  • Well, I knew about the rumor and the talks, but a little birdie told me it is now done.

    LocklandSF January 30, 2008, 1:37 pm
  • anybody working on a thread for this tidbit? andys rolling over on roger. not looking good for mr. splitty.

    sf rod January 30, 2008, 1:45 pm
  • Whoever believed the source that said this made the Mets the best team in the majors must have been suffering the effects of hyperventilation. Johan can only do so much, even if it’s a lot, and the Mets areas of concern stretched well beyond the lack of a #1 starter.
    But I’m not as sour on their new rotation as others seem to be. Perez is erratic but he seems to even out to mediocre, which is fine for his slot. I think Maine slots as a high #3, which is where he is. Hernandez should probably be a reliever/spot starter, where I think he’d excel and be less of an injury risk. I think Pedro is less of an injury risk going into this season, compared to when the Mets signed him. Doesn’t mean he won’t get injured, but he’s basically had the past two seasons off. If he’s not healthy now, he should make good on his word and retire. And Pelfrey did fall flat on his face last year but he still threw well. Unless he has some incurable problem upstairs, he’s going to figure out that the MLB plate is just as big as the one in the minors.
    But no amount of optimism regarding the rotation means that the bullpen is fixed (though Johan’s and Hernandez’ innings will have some ameliorative effect on it, hopefully) and it doesn’t counteract the team-wide implosion on offense that September showed was more than possible. (Though I don’t believe that their collapse was purely regression to the mean; the ineptitude and torpor on the team looked like more than just statistical shaking-out.)
    So I’m not begging Omar to find more pieces, mostly because there isn’t much left out there to get. This is the team Mets fans are going to get and I’m pretty okay with it, actually. At least the ‘dead team walking’ feeling has gone away for my NL club.

    FenSheaParkway January 30, 2008, 1:52 pm
  • Except Santana was always understood to be iffy on the prospect of a midseason trade. In fact, his unwillingness to accept a trade midseason was considered the most significant risk of such a strategy from the beginning.
    So in either case, Smith gambled on a good situation getting better, and instead it got worse. I don’t envy the man, having to do this as his first major transaction, but he comes out looking simply terrible here.

    Paul SF January 30, 2008, 1:53 pm
  • Bill James was on Max Kellerman this morning and he gave some pretty cool insight into the trade talks. He said if he was asked for his input he would made the trade if it was IPK +. He also wouldn’t comment on if he advised the Sox to make the trade. Although in the next breath he raved about the year Santana would have and the he would eventually be a “Hall of Famer.” He then said “there was more” to the trade then the public knows about. This was him answering the question of did he like the way the trade process was handled by Minnesota. He did not elaborate. He does not expect any fall off in Santana (rumblings of arm injury, etc..) He didn’t think last season was an off season just a normal year that every pitcher goes through. Pretty cool interview over all if it’s available on podcast.

    John - YF January 30, 2008, 2:11 pm
  • Oh yeah and ESPN Radio is reporting that Santana’s first choice was the Mets. Who knows how true that is.

    John - YF January 30, 2008, 2:12 pm
  • Well if you were Santana, who would you rather face: the AL East, or the NL East? I know what decision I would make, and it’s not even a tough one.
    SoxFan, that analogy is hilarious!

    Atheose January 30, 2008, 3:21 pm
  • I don’t know that to be true. Pitchers are very confident beings (on the whole). I don’t think a pitcher of Santana’s caliber would pick a team based on his opponents. I would have expected him to say Boston. It’s the town with the least amount of pressure to be the #1, they could have paid him equal to what the Mets will offer and they are the defending champs. I think there was more to this decision and maybe someday we will know for sure what that is. Could be comfort level with the multitude of hispanic players on the Mets? Who knows. Could have been just that simple.

    John - YF January 30, 2008, 3:33 pm
  • Wait, his first choice wasn’t the Marlins?

    SF January 30, 2008, 3:38 pm
  • I thought he was all Rockies, all the time.

    LocklandSF January 30, 2008, 3:50 pm
  • Here’s a funny one for you, I have been so used to making fun of the Rockies for so many years, that quip was my first instinct. Despite, you know, that World Series appearance and all.

    LocklandSF January 30, 2008, 3:52 pm
  • It was hardly an appearance, Lockland. They kinda have to show up, don’t they? ;-)

    Paul SF January 30, 2008, 4:06 pm
  • It’s funny how appropriate the word “appearance” is, Lockland. Cause showing up is pretty much all they did ;-)
    I agree that pitchers are confident, John, but I wouldn’t discount the AL East’s strength factoring into Johan’s decision.
    Also, the Sox have: Papi, Manny, Tavarez, Delcarmen*, Lugo, Lowell, Cora and Lopez, so I don’t think the Mets have a huge advantage when it comes to Hispanics.
    *I know Delcarmen was born in Boston, but his parents are both Dominican.

    Atheose January 30, 2008, 4:12 pm
  • Boo, you beat me to the comment Paul!

    Atheose January 30, 2008, 4:18 pm
  • I truly don’t know the reasoning, purely speculation.
    Not discounting, but being a former catcher I have yet to meet a successful pitcher that took the easy way and backed down from a challenge. You could be right though, who knows. All I know is he isn’t on the Red Sox and really at the end of the day that’s all that matters.
    Packing for Arizona as I type here. We leave tomorrow morning. Hopefully I will have an update on the atmosphere and so on by tomorrow evening. Going to a party Saturday night with Harry Carson, LT and Rodney Hampton, should have some good stuff to report!

    John - YF January 30, 2008, 4:19 pm
  • If anything, you would think it’s the other way around – pad your stats in the NL to get a huge contract in the AL..
    But ya, Santana doesn’t need to, though it’ll probably extend his career a little bit, not having to pitch to the #9 guy..

    Lar January 30, 2008, 4:27 pm
  • John, I hate you, lucky bastard.

    LocklandSF January 30, 2008, 4:42 pm
  • That’s awesome John… you’re going to have a blast! My dad used to always get superbowl tickets through his company, but I never got to go. Make sure you soak it all in!

    Atheose January 30, 2008, 4:44 pm
  • so really, no one cares that pettittes “2 day lapse in judgement brought on by an obligation to his team” has now become a little more than that? no one wonders if roger is gonna call andy and tape it? am i the only one who cares about this story? i figured we were all tired of the johan saga and ready to move on, and here’s the opportunity, but no one cares.
    trisk- do yourself a favor and go to any of the many Albertos taco shops in phoenix. they’re all open 24 hours. i recommend the one on indian school rd.

    sf rod January 30, 2008, 4:50 pm
  • The problem, rod, is that we’re all tired of the Clemens story, too. Doesn’t look good for him, though. The hearing will be interesting if Clemens is going to stick to his story despite being contradicted by two people who at one point were considered very close to him.

    Paul SF January 30, 2008, 4:55 pm
  • rod, this story will be clarified (or not) when Pettitte testifies. As it is, McNamee’s lawyer told the press this. He could be grandstanding. He could be telling the truth. We might get something more substantive after Pettitte actually testifies.

    Nick-YF January 30, 2008, 5:00 pm
  • Going to a party Saturday night with Harry Carson, LT and Rodney Hampton, should have some good stuff to report!
    Wow, partying with LT. Just make sure you don’t get a ride home from him, Trisk, unless he’s had a pretty large quantity of coffee beforehand.
    Have a great time, and GO PATS!!!!

    SF January 30, 2008, 5:08 pm
  • John, if a pitcher is confident in his abilities and proud like Johan probably is, wouldn’t he want to go to a team where there is more riding on him? If the Mets go all the way, it will most likely be because of him. If Johan was on the Sox last year, he’d still have been overshadowed by Beckett. I dunno. I figure this is just diplomacy. If he said his first choice was really the Yankees, for instance, think how that would go over in crazy Mets-land.

    AndrewYF January 30, 2008, 5:17 pm
  • Johan could have simply said in November “If I’m going to be dealt, I prefer it happens in the off-season.” Just a few days ago it certainly seems to have become “If I’m going to be dealt, it has to happen this off-season”.
    There’s a big difference there in how a GM can handle both statements. Indeed, I remember the Sox “trying” to trade Manny many times based on his wishes. But they never had to.
    Once Santana’s stance changed, which it obviously did in the last week, Smith had no choice but to get a deal done. He’ll take all the blame, but there’s little doubt in my mind that Santana completely forced his hand when previously it appears he wasn’t doing that. Faced with an onerous demand (who knows if it was even more absolute – “end of this week”) Smith appears to have made the only trade he could.

    A YF January 30, 2008, 5:41 pm
  • > so really, no one cares
    I care, but I only care to hear what Pettitte has to say. I don’t care to hear what McNamee’s attorneys choose to speculate about regarding to what Pettitte may or may not testify.

    attackgerbil January 30, 2008, 5:49 pm
  • That reads too much like pro-Smith. Regardless of what Santana said, if Smith wasn’t getting a decent package he could have pulled the plug completely and tried to restart things in July. If the Twins were out of the race, what MLB player, in their walk year, would want to play out a losing season versus join team in the hunt? It would have been a risky move, but waiting until the until the end of the off-season only to rush a move is just as risky. Besides, if the Mets were close in July that same package would have been waiting, and perhaps with a few other offers.

    A YF January 30, 2008, 5:52 pm
  • “As it is, McNamee’s lawyer told the press this. He could be grandstanding.”
    Emery, from all the quotes I’ve read, seems like a real piece of work… (read: scumbag)

    Anonymous January 31, 2008, 11:15 am

Leave a Comment

Next post:

Previous post: