Santana Rumors

cybsball20 · 11-30-2007, 11:19 AM

Originally Posted by trevn

Very good assessment of my Dodgers! I agree, they are the most logical team to trade with the Twins (or Marlins for Cabrera for that matter), but Colletti and the McCourts seem to be leaning towards not making any moves and sticking to our youth movement. I'm not sure who the Twins would want, but I would assume they'd want 4 of the following players: Matt Kemp - OF, James Loney - 1B, Andy LaRoche - 3B, Jonathan Broxton - RP, Jon Meloan - SP/RP, Chad Billingsly - SP, or Clayton Kershaw - SP in AA that is being compared to Liariano, but he's still about a year or so away from the majors. I'm undecided on whether getting Santana would be a huge improvement for the Dodgers. I think we'd be creating more holes than filling them if we did a deal like that. But it is Santana and he would definitely help our rotation out. One more thing, if the Red Sox get him, I'll be sick.

I think they Dodgers are looking to move Kemp and LaRoche since they were the two main young guys at the heart of the whole dispute last year... I actually think they will use LaRoche as a 'throw in' as Colletti seems to have soured on him this last year. Hu has major talent and nowhere to go with Furcal at SS and the Dodgers seem to love D. Young in the utility role... Martin, Ethier and maybe Loney are Billingsley are close to untouchable but I would imagine Colletti and McCourt would listen to anything involving the other young guys. They are getting ALOT of pressure to win this year so they need to pull out all the stops.

trevn · 11-30-2007, 11:32 AM

Originally Posted by cybsball20

I think they Dodgers are looking to move Kemp and LaRoche since they were the two main young guys at the heart of the whole dispute last year... I actually think they will use LaRoche as a 'throw in' as Colletti seems to have soured on him this last year. Hu has major talent and nowhere to go with Furcal at SS and the Dodgers seem to love D. Young in the utility role... Martin, Ethier and maybe Loney are Billingsley are close to untouchable but I would imagine Colletti and McCourt would listen to anything involving the other young guys. They are getting ALOT of pressure to win this year so they need to pull out all the stops.

Yeah they were at the heart of the dispute, but one of the key guys in that whole thing is gone...Luis Gonzalez. The other one, Kent, may or may not be back next year, although I think he'll be back. I'd hate to see Kemp go because I think he can be a great player. You're right about Martin being untouchable and maybe Loney. Bills could get traded and Ethier could get traded too as I think the Dodgers see Kemp with more upside and they have Young in waiting too. Also, Furcal I believe is in the final year of his contract so Hu could be a cheap and very talented option at SS for 09. Part of me just wants to see what the kids can do, especially with the success the Diamondbacks and Rockies had this year. I agree though, the Dodgers are getting a lot of pressure to win. If you hire Joe Torre and then do nothing to improve a 4th place team's roster, a lot of people are going to scratch their heads.

cybsball20 · 11-30-2007, 11:37 AM

Originally Posted by trevn

Yeah they were at the heart of the dispute, but one of the key guys in that whole thing is gone...Luis Gonzalez. The other one, Kent, may or may not be back next year, although I think he'll be back. I'd hate to see Kemp go because I think he can be a great player. You're right about Martin being untouchable and maybe Loney. Bills could get traded and Ethier could get traded too as I think the Dodgers see Kemp with more upside and they have Young in waiting too. Also, Furcal I believe is in the final year of his contract so Hu could be a cheap and very talented option at SS for 09. Part of me just wants to see what the kids can do, especially with the success the Diamondbacks and Rockies had this year. I agree though, the Dodgers are getting a lot of pressure to win. If you hire Joe Torre and then do nothing to improve a 4th place team's roster, a lot of people are going to scratch their heads.

The strange thing her is that Loney, Kemp, and LaRoche are NOT guys with bad attitudes... There was just a serious amount of discontention in that locker room, mostly brought on by the vets. Beleive me, I know more about this situation then anything you have read in the media (inside info). Also, DY has already cleared the Rule 5 once but that was before the big year last year. I just don't see Torre managing a team where all the talent is under 25 years old. You can't sit those guys if you keep them because they are all too talented to waste on the bench. You might as well get what you can for them...

wonkadog · 11-30-2007, 11:39 AM

I have no horse in this race but if the Dodgers deal 4 of those young guys, I think that'd be a huge mistake. Just when they've finally figured out they can't just buy a World Series (I mean they always seem to have a bunch of older stars that just don't come together for some reason), they then trade away some really good talent that they've invested a lot of time in? Doesn't make sense.

trevn · 11-30-2007, 11:51 AM

Originally Posted by cybsball20

The strange thing her is that Loney, Kemp, and LaRoche are NOT guys with bad attitudes... There was just a serious amount of discontention in that locker room, mostly brought on by the vets. Beleive me, I know more about this situation then anything you have read in the media (inside info). Also, DY has already cleared the Rule 5 once but that was before the big year last year. I just don't see Torre managing a team where all the talent is under 25 years old. You can't sit those guys if you keep them because they are all too talented to waste on the bench. You might as well get what you can for them...

That's sort of what I heard too, but obviously not through media sources, mostly message boards. I heard it was more of a Gonzalez and Kent thing against the young guys. I'll never know for sure though. I've also heard that the young guys didn't have bad attitudes either. I just think we had/ have the wrong kind of vets on our team that weren't really willing to mesh with the yonger talent, just a guess though. Right now I hope we do something with our surplus of young talent without giving it all away because I do want to see our young guys develop and play for us. It's funny to read Dodger message boards because they all agree we need a power bat and another pitcher but none of them are willing to trade any of our young guys.

trevn · 11-30-2007, 11:53 AM

Originally Posted by wonkadog

I have no horse in this race but if the Dodgers deal 4 of those young guys, I think that'd be a huge mistake. Just when they've finally figured out they can't just buy a World Series (I mean they always seem to have a bunch of older stars that just don't come together for some reason), they then trade away some really good talent that they've invested a lot of time in? Doesn't make sense.

I agree, I don't think the Dodgers should give up 4 players, but I do think that the Twins will and should ask for 4 players, and probably our best 4 young guys. If the price came down to 3 of our prospects, I'd strongly consider it, but again it would depend on who the wanted and what holes it would create.

cybsball20 · 11-30-2007, 11:57 AM

Originally Posted by trevn

That's sort of what I heard too, but obviously not through media sources, mostly message boards. I heard it was more of a Gonzalez and Kent thing against the young guys. I'll never know for sure though. I've also heard that the young guys didn't have bad attitudes either. I just think we had/ have the wrong kind of vets on our team that weren't really willing to mesh with the yonger talent, just a guess though. Right now I hope we do something with our surplus of young talent without giving it all away because I do want to see our young guys develop and play for us. It's funny to read Dodger message boards because they all agree we need a power bat and another pitcher but none of them are willing to trade any of our young guys.

The problem is that they are going to run into roster problems. There may not be enough space to just stockpile all this young talent... Sooner or later they are going to have to decide to get rid of some young guys or just let them all play... Funny thing is that some of their better games last year were with the 'all young' lineup. Back to their need for Santana though, unless Schmidt is back to his Ace self then they are in serious need of an anchor for the staff... I don't think the Japanese guy they are going after is the answer...

83Clone · 11-30-2007, 06:35 PM

Originally Posted by travman23

Either the Twins pay up for possibly the best pitcher in the game or they have to get something now before he leaves and they get nothing. All I hope is that he goes somewhere other than the Yankees! I think if they can get Reyes from the Mets that would be the best deal they could do. Reyes is one of the top SS in the game and a dangerous guy on the base paths. They could use a guy like that hitting ahead of Young, Morneu and Mauer.

They offered him $95MM and he turned it down cold.

Santana has no desire to stay in Minnesota and scenarios like this are exactly why I turned away from baseball after the strike in 94. There are about 4 teams who can afford to pay Santana so one of them will get him. Without some type of salary cap or revenue sharing (which seem to work in the other 2 major sports leagues?????) baseball will be dominated by the big boys.

They may not win every year (see the Yankees) but they have an unfair advantage over the rest of the league.

Case in point, I didn't research this but I read this and have no trouble believing it--the Yankees payroll is more than the Twins GROSS REVENUES. They have their own freaking TV network!!

How do you compete with that?

mjones34 · 11-30-2007, 06:51 PM

I think you HAVE to trade Santana and get something for him before he's lost to free agency. I'm a die hard twins fan, but they just don't have the money to keep him. It will be fun though if Liriano comes back to the way he was.

jdoggivjc · 11-30-2007, 07:12 PM

Originally Posted by 83Clone

They offered him $95MM and he turned it down cold.

Santana has no desire to stay in Minnesota and scenarios like this are exactly why I turned away from baseball after the strike in 94. There are about 4 teams who can afford to pay Santana so one of them will get him. Without some type of salary cap or revenue sharing (which seem to work in the other 2 major sports leagues?????) baseball will be dominated by the big boys.

They may not win every year (see the Yankees) but they have an unfair advantage over the rest of the league.

Case in point, I didn't research this but I read this and have no trouble believing it--the Yankees payroll is more than the Twins GROSS REVENUES. They have their own freaking TV network!!

How do you compete with that?

Well see, therein lies the problem - as one of the biggest sticking points in what was almost the strike that would have killed MLB as we know it in 2001 (I think that was the year), the players union absolutely refused to deal with the owners as long as they had a salary cap attached to the new labor agreement. Basically the only way the owners will ever get the salary cap is to break the player's union - which will require either a massive strike or lockout, to the point of risking the league (while the owners think the fans would turn on the players in such a scenario, the fans are pretty much disgusted with ownership as well). However, if anything's to be learned from the NHL, it just may be worth it to have something in place that will ensure competition among all teams (much to the dismay of Boston, both NY teams, both Chicago teams, and both LA teams). As ironic as it sounds, with the exception of the TV deal, the NHL's actually in better shape now than it was before the strike that killed a season and a half.

Wesley · 11-30-2007, 07:17 PM

If ARod is worth $300M to break Bonds HR record, Santanna must be worth $150M to get the best pitcher in the league outside of Josh Beckett. Yankees and red Sox will bid each other upo as they are scared the other will get him - or else they want the other to pay too much. Ha ha for Red Sox and Yankee fans. Raise the ticket prices.

I would think the Red Sox and Cubs need bigger stadiums to seat more people to pay all the bills. Am I wrong?

CTTB78 · 11-30-2007, 07:44 PM

While Terry Ryan made some great deals, his last year (getting nothing for Hunter) showed he wasn't into it anymore. Let's see what Trader Bill can do. So far so good.
Santana is maybe in the top five starters out there. Certainly not in the top three when you go .500 and lead the league in homers allowed (with three all-stars batting on the roster).
We need a third baseman and a center fielder. I hope we can get it done with the Mets or Dodgers as the two spend wads in the American league are getting old.

Wx4Cy · 11-30-2007, 08:33 PM

Well, if they are going to get screwed, it looks like they are at least trying to get dinner first.

The Official Site of Major League Baseball: News: Major League Baseball News

HGPuck · 11-30-2007, 08:44 PM

Its really shaping up to be who decides to bend first: the Yanks give up Hughes with Cabrera, the Sox give up Ellsbury with Lester, the Mets give up Wright or Reyes, or the Dodgers trade a grouping of young talent probably four guys (three if its the right combination). Im a big Twins fan and any of these four would be just fine with me. It is only my opinion but I think you would have to be crazy to lock in any pitcher for six or seven years at over 20m per no matter who you are, a hitter is one thing a pitcher is quite another. On a side note I think the right thing was to let Hunter go and the trade a few days ago gives us four of the best young hitters together anywhere but had to give up plenty to get there.