Article: Report: Twins And Ervin Santana Agree To Four-Year Deal

[SwainZag]

The signing by itself is okay. Santana is an upgrade over the guys we've been running out there, but it should be noted, he hasn't been a model of consistency over his career, hopefully we won't end up with one of his bad years right off the bat like we did with Nolasco. Still,, I like him as a mid-rotation guy and there isn't anything wrong in the signing by itself.

 

I still really don't like the way the Twins manage their budget to the bottom or middle. Think about this, what if the Twins signed Shields for 5-$100M,traded two low-level prospects for Brandon Moss (1- 7M estimated in arbitration), and didn't sign Hunter.  

 

For just 3 million more we would have a superior, consistent starter that you could even call a #1, and a comparable bat that can play the OF, even if it's just as well as Hunter. If you are concerned about the $3M, then don't tender Duensing, who is overpaid at as low-leverage leftie who can't get RH hitters out. 

 

To me this is just another example of Ryan not really taking advantage of his budgeted dollars. I know Shields hasn't signed yet, but I would expect that 5-100 will probably land him at this point. 

 

Who would you rather have Shields and Moss or Santana and Hunter? For me it's not even close. I expect both Sheilds and Moss to outperform the guys the Twins signed. When you operate on a fairly tight, limited budget, it's all about allocating those costs where you get the most bang for the buck, and this is the 3rd year in a row the Twins seems intent on doing just the opposite.

 

 

I wasn't that intrigued in Shields, especially at that price.  That arm has a lot of wear on it and his sinking K/9 rate makes me sheepish.   4/54 for Santana of 5/100 of Shields is quite the difference in price as well.

[Brock Beauchamp]

I was hoping this would turn out a lot better than it did, but...

 

Steamer projections for 2015:

GS IP R ER

Hughes 30 192 89 83

Gibson 28 163 90 82

Santana 32 189 90 86

Nolasco 30 182 99 92

*May/Meyer/Pelfrey/Milone 42 250 135 125

Rotation Total 162 976 503 478

**Bullpen 459 205 190

Total 162 1435 708 668

 

*approximation

**fills remainder of 2014 team IP and same 2014 bullpen ERA

 

2014's team runs allowed? 730.

It's hard for me to do anything but roll my eyes whenever I see (Cleveland) Steamer projections for individual players.

[nicksaviking]

I'm a bit disappointed that no one has made a joke that the Twins just paid $55m to Johan Santana.

 

They should have, in 2005.  That would have been just about right to buy out that second free agent year instead of only one.

[BrianTrottier]

I wasn't that intrigued in Shields, especially at that price.  That arm has a lot of wear on it and his sinking K/9 rate makes me sheepish.   4/54 for Santana of 5/100 of Shields is quite the difference in price as well.

 

Not to mention that Shields would actually have to have been willing to sign with the Twins. 

[JB_Iowa]

So if they are done

 

Hughes

Santana

Gibson

Nolasco

May/ Meyer

 

Graham

Oliveros/ Tonkin

Thielbar

Duensing

May/ Meyer

Fien

Perkins

 

 

Neil Allen .... let's see what you can do.

[Minnesota Boy]

Nope.  Ryan will insist on:

 

Hughes

Santana

Nolasco

Gibson

Pelfrey / Milone

 

with May and Meyer going to AAA for most of the season.

Honestly if they brought it Neil Allen to work with a bunch of veteran starters they are wasting their time.  I have no doubt he can help the veterans, but his forte is working with the young guys.  They're not going to make Tommy Milone any better of a pitcher, he just throws outside because his stuff is bad.  They can help Meyer or May become better pitchers.

[nater79a]

One thing I especially like about Ervin Santana is that he's an innings eater. With May/Meyer/Berrios possibly seeing time in the rotation this season there will be a number of short starts. Happens with all young starters,  Hopefully, Hughes and Santana can save the bullpen from getting worn down like the last couple years.

[whydidnt]

I wasn't that intrigued in Shields, especially at that price.  That arm has a lot of wear on it and his sinking K/9 rate makes me sheepish.   4/54 for Santana of 5/100 of Shields is quite the difference in price as well.

I get that, and Shields also benefited from playing in-front of KC's defense. Having said that, Shields K9 rate last year was still higher than Santana's was in each of the last 5 AL seasons of Santana's career. It's really hard to compare K rates between league, so I take Santana's rate last year with a grain of salt. Adding Pitchers to the opposing lineup does skew things. 

 

I agree WAR is a flawed statistic for measuring pitchers, but it still a good tool comparison puposes - bWAR over the last 4 years - Shields, 5.2, 2.7, 4.1 3.3 - Santana 3.0, -1.3, 2.9, 1.2.

 

Shields has pretty consistently been worth about 2 wins per year more than Santana. At about 6-7 Million per win, it's easy to see why he's 6.5M more expensive per year than Ervin. 

 

My point isn't to trash Santana. I think this is what he earns on the open market, just that the Twins need to aim higher, and with better money management could.

[SwainZag]

I get that, and Shields also benefited from playing in-front of KC's defense. Having said that, Shields K9 rate last year was still higher than Santana's was in each of the last 5 AL seasons of Santana's career. It's really hard to compare K rates between league, so I take Santana's rate last year with a grain of salt. Adding Pitchers to the opposing lineup does skew things. 

 

I agree WAR is a flawed statistic for measuring pitchers, but it still a good tool comparison puposes - bWAR over the last 4 years - Shields, 5.2, 2.7, 4.1 3.3 - Santana 3.0, -1.3, 2.9, 1.2.

 

Shields has pretty consistently been worth about 2 wins per year more than Santana. At about 6-7 Million per win, it's easy to see why he's 6.5M more expensive per year than Ervin. 

 

My point isn't to trash Santana. I think this is what he earns on the open market, just that the Twins need to aim higher, and with better money management could.

 

Oh I was in no way saying Santana is or was a better pitcher than Shields, cause that's just not true at all.  I didn't mean to compare K/9 rates either.  Just stating at age 31 and 32 Shields rate is dropping which is never a good sign in veterans.  I would have rather seen a 3 year with a 4th year option for Santana as well.  A 5 year deal for Shields just makes me cringe a bit.

[jay]

It's hard for me to do anything but roll my eyes whenever I see (Cleveland) Steamer projections for individual players.

Great. What do you propose instead to project 2015?

[TheLeviathan]

It's hard for me to do anything but roll my eyes whenever I see (Cleveland) Steamer projections for individual players.

I remember some lengthy whining about this same thing in regards to Joe Mauer last year and the starting pitchers and how did that turn out?

[tobi0040]

Levi,

They really missed on Meyer though. He didn't give up a single earned run for the twins. He was en fuego

[Kirby_waved_at_me]

Ervin Santana is an excellent consolation prize for the Twins after missing out on Lester, Scherzer, and Shields.

 

Especially considering Santana has a shorter and cheaper contract than those guys.

 

The comparisons to Nolasco just makes Ricky look better to me... I'm hoping that he regresses (in a positive direction) to the mean, too!

 

Maybe they'll still go after Brett Anderson - the more the merrier! Oh, and an outfielder! 

[shs_59]

PUKE .... I"m soo sick to the gutt punched stomach.

[shs_59]

Meanwhile Justin Masterson gets. $ 9.5 MM + incentives on a 1 Year Deal with Justin Masterson's Red Sox.

 

I'd of rather had Masterson on 2 for ~20 or 1 for ~ 10 million +  ....than Santana for 55 Million.

 

 

Nolasco looked like an OK signing this time last year, was the Exact same age....and now looks like a detriment....  I fail to see how this is any different.

 

Santana > than Nolasco  but by how much exactly? ; also as Seth says..... Ervin Santana is 32 years old..... just months younger than Nolasco.

 

 

Put me in the Boat, that dispises this signing..... why not make a trade for Mat Latos or sign Masterson on the cheap for less years?... or several other moves than to go "all in"  with the signing of Ervin "magical" Santana.

 

 

It feels as if TR and the FO needed or wanted to make a statement to the Rest of the AL Central "not so fast" we're still a member of this division....... in 2015?  who really cares... I'm eyeing 2016-2017 all along.

 

Ervin better pitch to his sabermetrics for 2015 and beyond and not what he actually did last year, in the AL that contract will look terrilbe fast.

[Brock Beauchamp]

I remember some lengthy whining about this same thing in regards to Joe Mauer last year and the starting pitchers and how did that turn out?

I said Steamer projections were crap last offseason and I still think they're full of crap. Just because they got a couple of things right doesn't mean we should ignore the legion of things they got wrong. They didn't even really get Mauer right... They overestimated his injury-riddled campaign. Same for Nolasco. They drastically underestimated Hughes.

 

Attempting to predict individual performance to the decimal point is absurd. It's akin to looking at the sky and predicting next month's weather to a tenth of a degree based on the fact that it's Tuesday and you like popsicles.

[ashbury]

Attempting to predict individual performance to the decimal point is absurd.

Displaying digits after the decimal point: shame on them.

 

Paying any attention to digits after the decimal point: shame on you.

 

If they think there is any value in what they do, it's not what comes after the decimal point.  Judge them on that.  (Which, I assume, is actually what you are doing - just not saying.)

[Brock Beauchamp]

Displaying digits after the decimal point: shame on them.

 

Paying any attention to digits after the decimal point: shame on you.

 

If they think there is any value in what they do, it's not what comes after the decimal point.  Judge them on that.  (Which, I assume, is actually what you are doing - just not saying.)

My point is that people deride WAR and defensive metrics and those things actually happened. It's an attempt to quantify things that actually occurred on planet earth and were witnessed by human beings.

 

Projections for individual players? There are hundreds of variables that cannot be accounted for and applying such an algorithm to individuals is going to miss far more often than it hits.

 

In the aggregate, Steamer is useful because a large data set is going to somewhat balance out the quirks of individual human beings. Some will overperform, some will underperform. Based in past performance, you can probably get something resembling an approximation of useful information if applied to a group of people.

 

But individuals? Nah. It's pointless. If your algorithm relies on a human being and their foibles as a constant, you're gonna be sorely disappointed on a regular basis.

[TheLeviathan]

I said Steamer projections were crap last offseason and I still think they're full of crap. Just because they got a couple of things right doesn't mean we should ignore the legion of things they got wrong. They didn't even really get Mauer right... They overestimated his injury-riddled campaign. Same for Nolasco. They drastically underestimated Hughes.

 

Attempting to predict individual performance to the decimal point is absurd. It's akin to looking at the sky and predicting next month's weather to a tenth of a degree based on the fact that it's Tuesday and you like popsicles.

 

Woofta.  First, they're not posting to the decimal point to show off or pat themselves on the back, it's just how they crank out their numbers.  Second, neither Steamer nor the poster here has pronounced themselves Vegas-proof and the new Nostradamus.

 

They don't have to be 100% accurate, but they are right often enough that consulting their projections is at the least a sometimes sobering and sometimes encouraging ballpark to work from.  

 

I mean, I don't ignore you because you get things wrong sometimes and aren't 100% accurate, I'm not sure why I would ignore a mathematical projection system either.  I'm also not betting my mortgage on what you project Phil Hughes to be, but nor am I doing so by Steamer.  And nor, as far as I can tell, is anybody else.  The problem comes from these silly overreactions to them both pro and con.

[Platoon]

One poster mentioned trading Nolasco in the event of a repeat of last year, and the Twins eating some salary! Historically they have not done this. My concern is the Twins still have no "ace"! but they do have a minimum of 60% of their starts allocated to 3 pitchers with no flexibility to move those starts. Short of an injury, they don't drop FA pitchers from the rotation. I wish they had went with a plan using our prospects to move forward. Instead I still fear we are stuck in no mans land, not good enough to win with the addition of a few pieces of second tier talent, but too cluttered up with second tier talent to see if we could build a winner in house? I once put lipstick on a pig! It was a waste of good lipstick!

 

[Brock Beauchamp]

I mean, I don't ignore you because you get things wrong sometimes and aren't 100% accurate, I'm not sure why I would ignore a mathematical projection system either.

I ignore projections because they cast players toward the mean.

 

If you're good, Steamer projects you to decline. If you're really bad, Steamer projects you to improve (unless you're ancient and in massive decline).

 

That's not analysis, that's hedging a bet. Yes, more good players will decline than improve and some good players will get injured and have an off year. So, technically, Steamer is "right" because in the aggregate, it technically gets more things "right" than it does "wrong" but that's a long way from "accurate".

[Craig Arko]

Accuracy vs. Precision

 

http://www.mathsisfun.com/accuracy-precision.html

[TheLeviathan]

I ignore projections because they cast players toward the mean.

 

If you're good, Steamer projects you to decline. If you're really bad, Steamer projects you to improve (unless you're ancient and in massive decline).

 

That's not analysis, that's hedging a bet. Yes, more good players will decline than improve and some good players will get injured and have an off year. So, technically, Steamer is "right" because in the aggregate, it technically gets more things "right" than it does "wrong" but that's a long way from "accurate".

 

Again, how is that any different or worse than any single other way of projecting?  The very nature of predicting the future is devoid of real analysis all the time.

[Thegrin]

I have always been a staunch Terry Ryan supporter. Now, after the signing of Hunter and Santana, I am wondering if he is losing it.  Perhaps the attendance falloff is pressuring him into desperate and ill advised moves.  We will see.

[jay]

So, technically, Steamer is "right" because in the aggregate, it technically gets more things "right" than it does "wrong" but that's a long way from "accurate".

I'm still really hoping to be enlightened on a better projection system or model that is readily available. That is, unless the message is simply forecasting is stupidly inaccurate and shouldn't be done at all.

[Otto von Ballpark]

It's hard for me to do anything but roll my eyes whenever I see (Cleveland) Steamer projections for individual players.

Brock, in this case, the individual projections were only used to derive a team forecast.

[clone52]

My only qualm about a deal with Santana is around my earlier point about opportunity cost. 

This deal brings the 2015 payroll into the range of $105M.  I think that's quite a bit higher than basically any of us were expecting.  That's great and all, but it would appear that adding other long-term commitments doesn't look likely with something like $95M committed for 2016 as well.  That probably leaves room to fill one hole next year where ever that might be, but it's hard to see tacking on a $20M+ ace.

 

Congrats to the Twins and Terry Ryan for aggressively seeking to improve what has been a dreadful rotation.

 

It was hard to see them tacking on a $20M+ ace in any scenario.  This move just moves the chances of that happening from almost 0 to even closer to 0.

[ashbury]

Projections for individual players? There are hundreds of variables that cannot be accounted for and applying such an algorithm to individuals is going to miss far more often than it hits..

And yet, teams have to make decisions all the time - this player or that player, how much to offer, etc.  Maybe you use some different word than projections, to describe how they do it. 

 

And I might add, semi-donning my moderator's cap, that this digression probably deserves a thread of its own if someone wants to carry it further, especially given that the topic of the thread itself remains active and of interest.

[Reider]

Terry Ryan identified pitching as an area that needed to be upgraded so he went out and signed a guy that he tried to sign last year. I have no issue with this. Rest assured, this will not cripple the organization financially.

[formerly33]

I called it!! As you can see by my hopeful predictions of the AL standings, I drew this picture back in early September while the regular season was just wrapping up. I was off by a long shot concerning the standings (though I didn't really think they would work out that way), but I was right on when it came to Ervin Santana! I obviously drew the pinstripes on the uniform - more evidence that this was drawn before we got him. I'm gonna miss them so much!