Article: Twins Trade Nolasco, Meyer, Cash To Angels For Hector Santiago

[alarp33]

Maybe, but again your contention is built on an assumption about 2017. Evaluate the deal for what it is right now. Nolasco and Meyer for a better starter and no extra money. That's a win.

6 years of Meyer, for a 2017 (95% chance it's a non playoff season) with Santiago instead of Nolasco (maybe a 1 win difference, assuming good health for each). Like Meyer or not, its a nonzero chance he could be a 2 win relief pitcher in say 2018 or 2019 when they could contend. And this is what the trade is when it comes down to it

 

We can phrase it either way to make our point, the trade sounds a little different when you read my summary instead of yours

Edited August 4, 2016 by alarp33

[TheLeviathan]

 

6 years of Meyer, for a 2017 (95% chance it's a non playoff season) with Santiago instead of Nolasco (maybe a 1 win difference, assuming good health for each). Like Meyer or not, its a nonzero chance he could be a 2 win relief pitcher in say 2018 or 2019 when they could contend. And this is what the trade is when it comes down to it

We can phrase it either way to make our point, the trade sounds a little different when you read my summary instead of yours

 

Yes, because your summary involves the creation of some person who shares the last name of Alex Meyer who appears to be good at baseball.

 

I'm going to pretend your pretend person's name is Ajax Meyer.  Sounds cooler.

Edited August 4, 2016 by TheLeviathan

[alarp33]

Yes, because your summary involves the creation of some person who shares the last name of Alex Meyer who appears to be good at baseball.

 

I'm going to pretend your pretend person's name is Ajax Meyer. Sounds cooler.

Alright we're just twisting words at this point, I clearly said there's a nonzero chance Meyer is a useful bullpen piece in 2018 or 2019 (which would be more valuable than a slightly better 5th starter in a rebuilding year), I hardly handed him the Cy Young. Appreciate the discussion, have a good night. Edited August 4, 2016 by alarp33

[DocBauer]

I had to weigh in here.

 

First and foremost, we can only evaluate the trade for what it is NOW, not what a healthy and more consistent Meyer could be. And really, we're talking about the players involved and what they bring to their teams. Let the money be a wash and just look at player value.

 

Santiago may be nothing special, but he absolutely is an upgrade over Nolasco, and not just because he's Yeats younger and LH. Levi brought up some numbers a page or so ago that testifies to Santiago being a better, more productive SP the past few years. In the recent TD blog, "Hector Housing Santiago", there is further detailed information how Santiago is much better than Nolasco with runners on base, and runners in scoring position.

 

This is absolutely a win for the Twins, and I doubt they let Santiago walk after this season unless he implodes or just doesn't fit in with the team.

 

And while I may get hammered for this, and am not a Meyer hater in any form, I think the arguement could be made that if Meyer becomes anything but a stud SP or closer in the next season or two, anything he does could be offset by other pitchers currently in the Twins system. Again, anything other than being a stud in either role, the Twins have a plethora of strong bullpen arms arriving soon to pick and choose from. And within the next couple of seasons, guys like Jay, Gonsalves, Stewart and a couple others will be pushing hard for a rotation spot.

[alarp33]

 

I had to weigh in here.

First and foremost, we can only evaluate the trade for what it is NOW, not what a healthy and more consistent Meyer could be. And really, we're talking about the players involved and what they bring to their teams. Let the money be a wash and just look at player value.
 

 

What does this even mean? The Angels traded for the next 6 years of Alex Meyer, not for just what he is today.  Why can't we evaluate it next year, or two years? Do you apply this same standard to the Nunez and Abad trades? Worthless, because the guys they traded for aren't in the Majors today?

 

 

Santiago may be nothing special, but he absolutely is an upgrade over Nolasco, and not just because he's Yeats younger and LH. Levi brought up some numbers a page or so ago that testifies to Santiago being a better, more productive SP the past few years. In the recent TD blog, "Hector Housing Santiago", there is further detailed information how Santiago is much better than Nolasco with runners on base, and runners in scoring position.

And while I may get hammered for this, and am not a Meyer hater in any form, I think the arguement could be made that if Meyer becomes anything but a stud SP or closer in the next season or two, anything he does could be offset by other pitchers currently in the Twins system. Again, anything other than being a stud in either role, the Twins have a plethora of strong bullpen arms arriving soon to pick and choose from. And within the next couple of seasons, guys like Jay, Gonsalves, Stewart and a couple others will be pushing hard for a rotation spot.

 

I'm not sure I'm understanding the fascination with Santiago's age.  The Twins only traded for him for 2017, age isn't really a factor in the deal.  

 

Yes, if the past couple of seasons have taught us anything, it's that the Twins have TOO MANY bullpen arms they don't know what to do.  Boshers, Boyer, Ramirez, etc.

 

[tobi0040]

I think Santiago is better than Nolasco, but one could argue that we were at a point with Ricky where we were going to DFA him and move on. Assuming we keep Santiago next year (I actually lean towards a new GM non-tendering him), but if we do keep him one could argue that this is not a good move because while we are better with him over Nolasco, that is really a false comparison since we weren't going to keep Nolasco in 2017.

 

So the real question in that scenario is are we better off with Santiago vs. something else? And would you rather take Santiago at $8-9m next year or think bigger and take some savings associated with Plouffe, Milone, Jepsen, Fien and this money to sign or trade for an actual good pitcher?

 

I have used this stat a few too many times. But Ricky had the worst ERA since 2014. So anything compared to him is better than him. How much better and a difference maker is the question. I think most would agree while an improvement, Santiago is not likely going to be be a top four arm on a team with a good rotation.

Edited August 4, 2016 by tobi0040

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Santiago may be nothing special, but he absolutely is an upgrade over Nolasco, and not just because he's Yeats younger and LH. Levi brought up some numbers a page or so ago that testifies to Santiago being a better, more productive SP the past few years. In the recent TD blog, "Hector Housing Santiago", there is further detailed information how Santiago is much better than Nolasco with runners on base, and runners in scoring position.

I'll agree that Santiago is better at the moment, but the edge probably isn't that dramatic.  As recently as July 1st, Nolasco was actually having a slightly better 2016 season than Santiago.  Even now, after a nice past month from Santiago, the difference is fairly slim -- 0.3 WAR for Nolasco, vs 0.9 WAR for Santiago.

 

2015 obviously Santiago has an advantage (1.8 WAR) over Nolasco's lost season.

 

In 2014, Nolasco was exactly replacement level, but Santiago was only worth 0.5 WAR himself.

 

In 2013, Santiago was worth a nice 2.8 WAR, but Nolasco wasn't far behind at 1.8 WAR (pre-Twins, obviously ).

 

This is all bWAR, mind you, so it's not counting any FIP advantage.  These numbers include Santiago's better performance with runners on base.

 

Not to mention, Santiago's career high in IP is only 180, a mark that Nolasco exceeded 5 times in the non-DH league, and was on pace to exceed again in 2016 despite his age and mediocre performance.

[tobi0040]

I'll agree that Santiago is better at the moment, but the edge probably isn't that dramatic.  As recently as July 1st, Nolasco was actually having a slightly better 2016 season than Santiago.  Even now, after a nice past month from Santiago, the difference is fairly slim -- 0.3 WAR for Nolasco, vs 0.9 WAR for Santiago.

 

2015 obviously Santiago has an advantage (1.8 WAR) over Nolasco's lost season.

 

In 2014, Nolasco was exactly replacement level, but Santiago was only worth 0.5 WAR himself.

 

In 2013, Santiago was worth a nice 2.8 WAR, but Nolasco wasn't far behind at 1.8 WAR (pre-Twins, obviously ).

 

This is all bWAR, mind you, so it's not counting any FIP advantage.  These numbers include Santiago's better performance with runners on base.

 

Not to mention, Santiago's career high in IP is only 180, a mark that Nolasco exceeded 5 times in the non-DH league, and was on pace to exceed again in 2016 despite his age and mediocre performance.

I am not sure an inning advantage for Nolasco is a good thing!

[nicksaviking]

 

I'll agree that Santiago is better at the moment, but the edge probably isn't that dramatic.  As recently as July 1st, Nolasco was actually having a slightly better 2016 season than Santiago.  Even now, after a nice past month from Santiago, the difference is fairly slim -- 0.3 WAR for Nolasco, vs 0.9 WAR for Santiago.

 

 

I don't think it's only comparing Nolasco and Santiago though. With the addition of Santiago to the rotation, the Twins have a new token lefty so Santiago is really replacing both Nolasco and Milone.

 

If the Twins are going to have an overpaid and cringeworthy veteran AND an under-performing token lefty, I'd rather they be the same guy.

[Otto von Ballpark]

I think our Twins-colored glasses obscure a few facts.

 

As bad as Nolasco has been, he didn't have zero absolute value.  He had severe negative value relative to his salary, but healthy and eating innings at an 82 ERA+ level this year, he had some modest absolute value.  A little credit to the Twins, I suppose, for not unloading him before he was back and healthy, and for not shuffling him to the bullpen yet which could have sapped his value further.

 

And likewise, as frustrating as Meyer has been, he didn't have zero absolute value either.  He had negative value relative to where he was 1-2 years ago, but he too still had some modest absolute value.  More credit to the Twins for keeping him away from surgery this long, even if he's missed a lot of action -- shoulder surgery would have reduced his value much more than being inactive with an apparently clean MRI.

 

As disappointing/frustrating as they were, neither pitcher was in particular danger of being released for nothing.  That we combined them to get Santiago + Busenitz, or $8 mil salary relief + Busenitz if we non-tender Santiago, was a little surprising because of the combination and the timing, but it really wasn't that far off from their present value (even if you like the trade).

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I am not sure an inning advantage for Nolasco is a good thing!

I know, I thought that too.  The argument can cut both ways, depending on what you need from the rotation spot, etc.  Mediocre innings do seem to have some value -- maybe not to us, but to someone else in a different situation.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I don't think it's only comparing Nolasco and Santiago though. With the addition of Santiago to the rotation, the Twins have a new token lefty so Santiago is really replacing both Nolasco and Milone.

Perhaps.  Although it should be noted that Milone is and will be cheaper.  Acquiring Santiago and intending to tender him probably precludes us from taking a cheap flyer on Milone or another SP this winter -- not that I have a lot of faith in Milone, but given his track record, there are probably worse ways to spend a couple mil for rotation depth.  A buy-low FA SP might have been an interesting use of the spot too.

 

Didn't you often make the point that more expensive players are generally harder to cut/demote/replace?  Santiago at $8 mil next year should have a shorter leash than Nolasco at $12 mil, but both are way ahead of Milone at whatever he is going to make (have to imagine an arb cut would be in his future, if not a nontender and cheap re-sign), or some Bud Norris like FA.  Milone could probably even be sent outright off the 40-man roster to AAA again as needed (he will still be short of 5 years service time for a bit longer, so he couldn't elect free agency without forfeiting the salary).

[tobi0040]

I think our Twins-colored glasses obscure a few facts.

 

As bad as Nolasco has been, he didn't have zero absolute value.  He had severe negative value relative to his salary, but healthy and eating innings at an 82 ERA+ level this year, he had some modest absolute value.

I don't neccesarily agree with this. In theory i think he proves that you could accumulate WAR at the SP position no matter how bad you are. But he was worse than all other qualified starters.

 

To me it comes down to the alternative. Could we have pieced together Nolasco's innings and thrown someone out there who would have given up fewer runs, i.e. a lower than 5.50 ERA? Between guys like Dean, Wheeler, Berrios, some minor league free agent, Trevor May, etc. I have a hard time believing we would have been worse off.

 

And that doesn't even factor in the value associated with setting your team up in the future. Even if Berrios or May would have matched his 5.50 ERA, you could argue them getting some innings has some value to the team.

[Otto von Ballpark]

More on the surprising timing of the trade: while it was made on the non-waiver deadline day, and couldn't have been made in August (Meyer would have been claimed), the entire trade could have been made in the offseason too.

 

On flexibility: by making this trade now, while it does give the new GM the choice to tender Santiago or save $8 mil this winter, doesn't it also preclude the new GM from being able to salvage something more from Meyer and, to a lesser extent, from Nolasco?  Meyer still had an option year in 2017, and Nolasco still had time on his deal.  Hopefully our new head of baseball ops is looking at the personnel and practices that contributed to Meyer's and Nolasco's problems here, and working to address them quickly.

 

Obviously, we won't know for sure, but it feels like this trade, and the Santiago or $8 mil savings options, could have still been on the table in October.

[alarp33]

 

I don't think it's only comparing Nolasco and Santiago though. With the addition of Santiago to the rotation, the Twins have a new token lefty so Santiago is really replacing both Nolasco and Milone.

 

If the Twins are going to have an overpaid and cringeworthy veteran AND an under-performing token lefty, I'd rather they be the same guy.

 

This is quite a stretch. 

 

Milone could've been the token lefty and Nolasco still could've been gone, through other methods.  

 

Of course Adalberto Mejia could've been an internal LH option next year as well 

Edited August 4, 2016 by alarp33

[jorgenswest]

Looking forward to a good start from Santiago and a sweep of Cleveland. I doubt this trade does much to shift the future of the Twins, but I do have more interest in today's game.

Edited August 4, 2016 by jorgenswest

[tobi0040]

More on the surprising timing of the trade: while it was made on the non-waiver deadline day, and couldn't have been made in August (Meyer would have been claimed), the entire trade could have been made in the offseason too.

 

On flexibility: by making this trade now, while it does give the new GM the choice to tender Santiago or save $8 mil this winter, doesn't it also preclude the new GM from being able to salvage something more from Meyer and, to a lesser extent, from Nolasco?  Meyer still had an option year in 2017, and Nolasco still had time on his deal.  Hopefully our new head of baseball ops is looking at the personnel and practices that contributed to Meyer's and Nolasco's problems here, and working to address them quickly.

 

Obviously, we won't know for sure, but it feels like this trade, and the Santiago or $8 mil savings options, could have still been on the table in October.

I think Ricky was held to the deadline in hopes we could haved moved him. I think he was a DFA candidate after. Sure, we could have put him on the DL or in AAA, or the pen. But as you note, the valuable piece of the trade would have likely not cleared waivers and those actions for Nolasco would have lowered his already low value.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I don't neccesarily agree with this. In theory i think he proves that you could accumulate WAR at the SP position no matter how bad you are. But he was worse than all other qualified starters.

To me it comes down to the alternative. Could we have pieced together Nolasco's innings and thrown someone out there who would have given up fewer runs, i.e. a lower than 5.50 ERA? Between guys like Dean, Wheeler, Berrios, some minor league free agent, Trevor May, etc. I have a hard time believing we would have been worse off.

And that doesn't even factor in the value associated with setting your team up in the future. Even if Berrios or May would have matched his 5.50 ERA, you could argue them getting some innings has some value to the team.

I'm not saying he had value to the Twins.

 

What I'm saying is, a pitcher eating innings with a low-80's ERA+ generally still has some absolute value in the league.  Particularly if they have some past record of decent performance like Nolasco, solid peripherals, and a great case for change-of-scenery (he's only ever struggled this much in Minnesota).

 

Heck, the Dodgers paid $1.5 mil in salary (plus I think a modest cash payment to the Twins, I thought I heard $250k) for less than 2 months of Kevin Correia in 2014.  Someone would have paid $3-4 mil for Nolasco right now if we were willing to eat the rest of his salary, I am sure, just as a low-risk flyer / innings eater.

Edited August 4, 2016 by spycake

[tobi0040]

I'm not saying he had value to the Twins.

 

What I'm saying is, a pitcher eating innings with a low-80's ERA+ generally still has some absolute value in the league.  Particularly if they have some past record of decent performance like Nolasco, solid peripherals, and a great case for change-of-scenery (he's only ever struggled this much in Minnesota).

 

Heck, the Dodgers paid $1.5 mil in salary (plus I think a modest cash payment to the Twins, I thought I heard $250k) for less than 2 months of Kevin Correia in 2014.  Someone would have paid $3-4 mil for Nolasco right now if we were willing to eat the rest of his salary, I am sure.

I gotcha now. The value being defined as the other team thinks a chance exists that a change of scenery, new coach, whatever will draw potentially better results. Because the mid 5 ERA is something most teams should be able to exceed via the same methods the twins have, prospects, AAA fillers, waiver wire, etc.

Edited August 4, 2016 by tobi0040

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I gotcha now. The value being defined as the other team thinks a chance exists that a change of scenery, new coach, whatever will draw potentially better results. Because the mid 5 ERA is something most teams should be able to exceed via the same methods the twins have, prospects, AAA fillers, waiver wire, etc.

Yup.  A low-risk flyer.  The fact that he was healthy and eating innings with a 82 ERA+ isn't very valuable on its own, although I suppose some desperate team could plug a hole with it, especially in August -- it's better than, say, calling up Kyle Lohse! or perhaps trading for Kevin Correia circa 2014 -- but I think it easily satisfies a threshold of more general interest.  He's been healthy and non-disastrous this year, I think it's fair to say he'd generate decent interest as a $3-4 mil flyer or August hole-plugger.

 

This trade kind of confirms that -- I doubt the Angels would have made this deal if Nolasco were really on the cusp on release, like Edwin Jackson last year.  They may have done something around Santiago for Meyer, but they wouldn't have agreed to pay Nolasco $8 mil next year if he was an absolute zero.

Edited August 4, 2016 by spycake

[tobi0040]

Yup. A low-risk flyer. The fact that he was healthy and eating innings with a 82 ERA+ isn't very valuable on its own, although I suppose some desperate team could plug a hole with it, especially in August -- it's better than, say, calling up Kyle Lohse! or perhaps trading for Kevin Correia circa 2014 -- but I think it easily satisfies a threshold of more general interest. He's been healthy and non-disastrous this year, I think it's fair to say he'd generate decent interest as a $3-4 mil flyer or August hole-plugger.

 

This trade kind of confirms that -- I doubt the Angels would have made this deal if Nolasco were really on the cusp on release, like Edwin Jackson last year. They may have done something around Santiago for Meyer, but they wouldn't have agreed to pay Nolasco $8 mil next year if he was an absolute zero.

It is tough to know the value they placed on Meyer and what we simply could have sold him to the Angels for. This is a deep pocketed team. Clearly an owner that is competitive and wants to win.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Why does everyone think Santiago will be non-tendered? Assuming the $8m salary being bandied about here, he would actually be underpaid for a #3 or 4 starter so the reason for non-tendering wouldn't appear to be money.  There also doesn't appear to be anyone he would be blocking at the start of next season. Berrios now has a spot as does Duffey.  The only SPs in AAA who are potentially ready are Wheeler , with all of his soft tossing red flags, and the new guy from SF. There is no one in FA to get. Hughes is a major question mark after the surgery. Effectively for next year you have:

 

Santana - effective, but aging

Gibson - inconsistent but should be better, will he ever put it together?

Santiago - consistent for the last 2 years at a mid to back end starter range

Berrios - great potential, no track record

Duffey - Decent potential, but do we get the 2015 model (good) or the 2016 model (AAA quality)

Hughes - complete crap shoot, may now be a RP at best

Wheeler - potential, but serious red flags

Mejia - potential, probably more than Duffey or Wheeler

 

With that lineup and the fact that the AA guys won't be ready at least at the beginning of the year, why on earth would you non-tender Santiago?  He's a decent mid-rotation guy at a reasonable cost and also good veteran insurance if Santana starts to show his age and Gibson still can't quite put it together.

 

I think there is almost no chance that Santiago is non-tendered unless he just stinks for the rest of the year or gets injured. The choice will be between arbitration/one year agreement and a 2 year deal that buys out the risk that he leaves just when Santana falls of the proverbial cliff and the young guys turn out to be more potential than reality.  Plan on him here for at least 2017 and I would guess 2018 and 2019 as well.  

 

I think he is non-tendered if he STINKS, or if Hughes is healthy and they expect him to start next year (uh, ya, no....).

[tobi0040]

Why does everyone think Santiago will be non-tendered? Assuming the $8m salary being bandied about here, he would actually be underpaid for a #3 or 4 starter so the reason for non-tendering wouldn't appear to be money.  There also doesn't appear to be anyone he would be blocking at the start of next season. Berrios now has a spot as does Duffey.  The only SPs in AAA who are potentially ready are Wheeler , with all of his soft tossing red flags, and the new guy from SF. There is no one in FA to get. Hughes is a major question mark after the surgery. Effectively for next year you have:

 

Santana - effective, but aging

Gibson - inconsistent but should be better, will he ever put it together?

Santiago - consistent for the last 2 years at a mid to back end starter range

Berrios - great potential, no track record

Duffey - Decent potential, but do we get the 2015 model (good) or the 2016 model (AAA quality)

Hughes - complete crap shoot, may now be a RP at best

Wheeler - potential, but serious red flags

Mejia - potential, probably more than Duffey or Wheeler

 

With that lineup and the fact that the AA guys won't be ready at least at the beginning of the year, why on earth would you non-tender Santiago?  He's a decent mid-rotation guy at a reasonable cost and also good veteran insurance if Santana starts to show his age and Gibson still can't quite put it together.

 

I think there is almost no chance that Santiago is non-tendered unless he just stinks for the rest of the year or gets injured. The choice will be between arbitration/one year agreement and a 2 year deal that buys out the risk that he leaves just when Santana falls of the proverbial cliff and the young guys turn out to be more potential than reality.  Plan on him here for at least 2017 and I would guess 2018 and 2019 as well.

Just a personal opinion here. But a new GM comes in and assesses the roster. The conclusion is the biggest issue is starting pitching. While in a vacuum, $8m for him is a decent bargain.

 

But when you have nearly $15-20m off the books in Plouffe, Jepsen, Fien, etc. I think Santiago's $8m will look like a nice way to improve the rotation. Especially when you consider most of the lineup will be consumed by rookie deals.

Edited August 4, 2016 by tobi0040

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Why does everyone think Santiago will be non-tendered?

Not everyone thinks he will be non-tendered!

 

It is Santiago's last arb season. Pretty much every non-elite guy looking at non-trivial scratch is kind of a borderline non-tender by that point (i.e. Plouffe).

 

But at this point, if I had to guess, I'd guess he was tendered.  But the new GM should have all of November to sign or trade for someone before that decision has to be made.

[alarp33]

http://media.salon.com/2014/07/kermit_lipton.jpg

[alarp33]

*That was just posted in a good fun.  Obviously 1 start means nothing

 

But I miss Ricky already

[ashbury]

But I miss Ricky already

That's funny, because no batters ever seemed to.

[LaBombo]

 

Yup.  A low-risk flyer.  The fact that he was healthy and eating innings with a 82 ERA+ isn't very valuable on its own, although I suppose some desperate team could plug a hole with it, especially in August -- it's better than, say, calling up Kyle Lohse! or perhaps trading for Kevin Correia circa 2014 -- but I think it easily satisfies a threshold of more general interest.  He's been healthy and non-disastrous this year, I think it's fair to say he'd generate decent interest as a $3-4 mil flyer or August hole-plugger.

 

Reluctantly agree with the idea that Nolasco had still had value, although arguably not to the Twins.

 

His game log shows what is probably his greatest asset at the moment.  He went 6 innings or more in two thirds of his starts, and only went fewer than 5 innings twice in 21 starts.  Everything else aside, a starter who pitches more innings than the bullpen almost every time out still helps most teams on some level.

[TheLeviathan]

Using WAR to compare Santiago and Nolasco is intentionally stacking the deck.  WAR relies on FIP or xFIP and those stats consistently tell us Nolasco should be better than he is, but he is consistently worse.  And has been over a very large sample.  Santiago is the exact opposite.

 

The career ERA+ is 107 to 89.  That tells a much better story about what the two pitchers have actually done, rather than what best predicts what they should do.  And there is a plenty large enough sample size to confirm the difference.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Using WAR to compare Santiago and Nolasco is intentionally stacking the deck. WAR relies on FIP or xFIP and those stats consistently tell us Nolasco should be better than he is, but he is consistently worse. And has been over a very large sample. Santiago is the exact opposite.

 

WAR at B-Ref is not based on FIP. Not sure to whom you are responding, but that is the WAR I was using (and I noted as such in my post). Edited August 4, 2016 by spycake