Santana

nsacpi said:
Depends a on the price. With a pitcher in his 30s I'd look for a substantial discount. If he's willing to sign for 8M per year for 3 years I'd be for it. I doubt he'd be willing to do that.
Click to expand...

He turned down like 3/33 or 3/36 from the Twins this past yr. I'd say the odds of him taking a pay cut are zero if he has another yr similar to last yr.
 
It was actually reported to be 3 yrs and between 30-33 mil according to MLBTR. So we both were kinda right.
 
Stepping away for a while, then reading this article in the print verion this morning, changed my mind.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...wood-frank-wren-best-era-in-baseball/7845543/

If it's a reasonable deal, then why wouldn't re-signing Santana at least be considered? One way or another, the qualifying offer should be a no-brainer.

This is the part that left an impression:

Oh, and before anyone thinks this is just a two-week fluke, the Braves' pitching may actually be getting better. Starters Mike Minor and Gavin Floyd are scheduled to rejoin the team within a few weeks. And the minor-league system is loaded with Lucas Sims, Jason Hursh, Mauricio Cabrera, Wes Parsons, J.R. Graham and Shae Simmons.
Click to expand...

At least one of that group is going to excellent. One or two others will be good to very good major leaguers and the others will be trade fodder, get hurt, or fizzle.
 
Carp said:
It was actually reported to be 3 yrs and between 30-33 mil according to MLBTR. So we both were kinda right.
Click to expand...

I just recall that they low-balled him a bit (or at least I thought they did). It was kind of come and gone up here in the Twin Cities media.
 
Knucksie said:
Stepping away for a while, then reading this article in the print verion this morning, changed my mind.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...wood-frank-wren-best-era-in-baseball/7845543/

If it's a reasonable deal, then why wouldn't re-signing Santana at least be considered? One way or another, the qualifying offer should be a no-brainer.
Click to expand...

Knucksie, I think because they can get what he gives them for a fraction of the price. They really don't need all those guys to come up aces, only one or two.

Unless we get more than our share of injuries, and maybe we will. I sure don't know why we're the nation's Tommy John Capital.
 
GovClintonTyree said:
Knucksie, I think because they can get what he gives them for a fraction of the price. They really don't need all those guys to come up aces, only one or two.

Unless we get more than our share of injuries, and maybe we will. I sure don't know why we're the nation's Tommy John Capital.
Click to expand...

Let's say, hypothetically, that Santana could be good for 17 wins this season, which is a really good season by current standards. A decent #5 starter will offer maybe 10 wins, more on a better team. So, let's assume that somebody like Graham is ready to make the jump next year. He could conceivably win at least 10 decisions. Continued improvement from Teheran and Wood could help compensate, along with bullpen wins. So, yeah, for the millions of dollars difference in salary, there are other ways to reach the same goal.
 
Knucksie said:
Let's say, hypothetically, that Santana could be good for 17 wins this season, which is a really good season by current standards. A decent #5 starter will offer maybe 10 wins, more on a better team. So, let's assume that somebody like Graham is ready to make the jump next year. He could conceivably win at least 10 decisions. Continued improvement from Teheran and Wood could help compensate, along with bullpen wins. So, yeah, for the millions of dollars difference in salary, there are other ways to reach the same goal.
Click to expand...

The other part of the equation has to do with whether the dollars we might hypothetically spend on Santana might be better spent on long-term deals for Heyward and/or Justin Upton.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top