Is anyone else baffled by the fact that Ervin Santana's name never came up once this week in trade rumors?

 

Lets look at the reasons why Santana should have a lot of value in the trade market:

• Very weak Free Agent Starting Pitcher market: Would you rather have Rich Hill (The top FA starting pitcher) at age 37, for 3 years, $48 million or Ervin Santana at age 34 for 3 years, $41 million (Last year is a team option. Santana would be off the books at the latest by age 36. I would choose Santana, and AT WORST it would be a coinflip. 
• A contract that looks better and better: Santana is very affordable at 2 years, $27 million over the next two seasons with a $14 million team option for 2019. Based on some of the contracts that are being signed now and his resurgence in 2016 makes this value look very fair.
• Has a very consistent track record and health: Santana has started 30 games or more in all of the past 7 seasons besides 2015 when he was suspended for the first half. Even that season he never missed a start after his suspension was up. He has also had an ERA of 4.00 or lower in 6 of those 7 seasons and pitched 200+ innings 4 times. 
• Great Numbers last season in the AMERICAN LEAGUE: (3.38 ERA, 4 WAR, 181 innings pitched). For a reference, Chris Sale had a 3.34 ERA and a WAR of 5. Santana ranked 10th in the AL in ERA and 15th in WAR for a Starting Pitcher. It was also a better ERA than the following players: Danny Duffy, Marco Estrada, CC Sabathia, David Price, Chris Archer, Yordano Ventura, and Dallas Keuchel. Not saying he is better than these guys, but you could certainly argue he had a better 2016 than a majority of them
• Contending Teams always need starting pitching. You can never have too much pitching. With a weak FA market, you would think teams would get desperate and overpay for a guy like Santana. 

 

I know the first argument will be, "Why would we trade our best starting pitcher when we need starting pitching?". I get that argument. But my argument is if you can trade Santana a peak value for a couple of top 100 prospects and young controllable pitching, shouldn't you entertain that? By the time the Twins will be ready to contend for a strong playoff run, Santana will likely be gone or 36 years old. So wouldn't it make sense to get top return for him at his peak? I'm not saying that the Twins could get a Chris Sale like package for Santana, nor am I trying to say his valuable is comparable to the elite level guys like Sale, but I expected them to explore the trade market for him a bit more and for other teams to make some offers on him. 

 

Let me know what you guys think.

Edited December 8, 20169 yr by Baseball Bat

Good post.

My two cents: Santana might be a lot of teams plans B/C, so I could see him getting dealt later in the off season? Or during the season.

Yeah, he would be cream of the free agent crop. Clearly though the White Sox also saw the market deficiency moving Sale and shopping Quintana. Maybe it will pick up once/if Quintana is dealt and if the Rays end up dealing any of their arms.

 

I'd like to see the Twins start offering him as a (slightly) more affordable option in terms of prospects to those pitchers.

Excellent post, couldn't agree more.  I hope these conversations are happening as some team's Plan B.

Dave?

I agree, I am really surprised we aren't hearing interest in him. He is a legit MLB pitcher on a bad team....

Agreed it makes sense to move him. It appears the new regime is in no rush to make trades, hopefully they are maximizing value. It may still happen.

 

Dave?

No idea. Like I said, I only get tipped on things once in a great while.

I would consider this offseason a huge success if both Erv and Dozier are traded. The Rangers and Blue Jays both showed interest in him at the July trade deadline. Can't imagine that has changed. There should be multiple teams to speak with about Erv.

No idea. Like I said, I only get tipped on things once in a great while.

Right. Got it. So... it's Seattle?

Could it be that we and the Twins see more than the rest of the league?  Are we home biased?  Do we have so little to compare that we assume that our best is worth something?  If Santana is not getting any attention, imagine what Gibson must be worth. 

 

Could it be that we and the Twins see more than the rest of the league?  Are we home biased?  Do we have so little to compare that we assume that our best is worth something?  If Santana is not getting any attention, imagine what Gibson must be worth. 

Santana had more value at the deadline this year, but he still has real value now.  Based on what some think Dozier is worth, Santana also isn't worth as much as some might think.

 

Is anyone else baffled by the fact that Ervin Santana's name never came up once this week in trade rumors?

 

I'd be baffled if his name did not come up in conversations, and I suspect that it did.  Just it was not publicized...

Right. Got it. So... it's Seattle?

Sure, why not?

I'm wondering if we can use the Sale trade to gage what the market for Santana might be right now.

 

Sale to Boston: 2B Yoan Moncada (#2 overall), RHP Michael Kopech (#30 overall), OF Luis Alexander Basabe (B level prospect), RHP Victor Diaz (C level prospect). 

 

Rumored trade to Nationals: RHP Lucas Giolito (#3 overall), OF Victor Robles (#10 overall), and we can probably assume there was both a B and C level prospect included. 

 

 

So maybe Santana could bring back one of the following?

1) one top 50 prospect, a B prospect, a C prospect

2) two prospects in the top 50-150 range, a B prospect 

 

 

Edited December 9, 20169 yr by olivia11

I would think that Maybe he serves as someone that might hold as much, if not more trade value at the trade deadline. That also buys the team time to see who is ready to be in the rotation or bullpen, or stay/be sent to minors. Keeps service clock down on a guy or two maybe?

 

I'm wondering if we can use the Sale trade to gage what the market for Santana might be right now.

 

Sale to Boston: 2B Yoan Moncada (#2 overall), RHP Michael Kopech (#30 overall), OF Luis Alexander Basabe (B level prospect), RHP Victor Diaz (C level prospect). 

 

Rumored trade to Nationals: RHP Lucas Giolito (#3 overall), OF Victor Robles (#10 overall), and we can probably assume there was both a B and C level prospect included. 

 

 

So maybe Santana could bring back one of the following?

1) one top 50 prospect, a B prospect, a C prospect

2) two prospects in the top 50-150 range, a B prospect 

 

Santana's a pretty consistent 3 WAR player and it's reasonable to expect close to that for the next couple of seasons. So, that would give him around $20M in surplus value which roughly equals one prospect in the #50-100 range.

Edited December 9, 20169 yr by twins_89

 

Santana's a pretty consistent 3 WAR player and it's reasonable to expect close to that for the next couple of seasons. So, that would give him around $20M in surplus value which roughly equals one prospect in the #50-100 range.

If the team exercises the option, it goes to 30M.

 

If the team exercises the option, it goes to 30M.

 

I always forget about Santana's option year. As you pointed out that should add additional value, especially since an option like that is valuable for an older player like Santana. The team gets positive value if Santana pitches well and they pick up the option and there is no negative value if Santana's production drops off.

 

Is anyone else baffled by the fact that Ervin Santana's name never came up once this week in trade rumors?

 

I heard he had a no trade rumor clause in his contract.

I heard he had a no trade rumor clause in his contract.

Touche

 

I heard he had a no trade rumor clause in his contract.

You win the internets.

I heard he had a no trade rumor clause in his contract.

You heard.... making your post a...

 

 

Santana's a pretty consistent 3 WAR player and it's reasonable to expect close to that for the next couple of seasons. So, that would give him around $20M in surplus value which roughly equals one prospect in the #50-100 range.

Interesting.  How do you figure out what the equates to in prospects?  So at $20-30M, would you say that equals one top 50-100 prospect, one B prospect, one C prospect?   If that's the case, I'm not sure if it's worth it to trade him quite yet.  Could try to trade Santiago instead (for a B and a C?) to free up space in the rotation.

I feel like the front office made it clear some time ago that they weren't planning on moving Santana because the pitching situation is too dire to send the best guy they have packing.  Certainly if an offer came up that blew them away they would consider it, but moving him wasn't part of their plan.  

 

You say you're surprised that there hasn't been Santana talk, but I'm surprised that you're surprised.

Edited December 9, 20169 yr by Doomtints

 

Interesting.  How do you figure out what the equates to in prospects?  So at $20-30M, would you say that equals one top 50-100 prospect, one B prospect, one C prospect?   If that's the case, I'm not sure if it's worth it to trade him quite yet.  Could try to trade Santiago instead (for a B and a C?) to free up space in the rotation.

 

Surplus value and how it relates to top 100 prospects has been analyzed based on historical stats. The updated edition can be found here:

 

http://www.thepointofpittsburgh.com/mlb-prospect-surplus-values-2016-updated-edition/

I bet having the suspension hurts his value big time to the point where it makes no sense to move him.

I bet having the suspension hurts his value big time to the point where it makes no sense to move him.

What? Being suspended 2 years ago isn't effecting his value right now.

The best thing we can hope for is that he has a great first half so we can get max value for him at the deadline. No sense in dealing him until then IMO

 

What? Being suspended 2 years ago isn't effecting his value right now.

I think there is a small effect.  It's a data point suggesting that he relied on PEDs before but either won't be able to use them going forward, or using them will risk a year long suspension.  Which wouldn't be such a big deal if he was a free agent right now, because the signing team would reclaim his salary during any suspensions, but there is no such mechanism to reclaim prospects spent to acquire him in trade (just like there wasn't any mechanism for the Twins to reclaim the draft pick they forfeited to sign him, even though he had yet to throw a regular season pitch for us at that point).

 

It's probably way down the list of concerns, but I wouldn't discount it completely.  The biggest issue is probably that he's just not viewed as a front-line option, and teams are far more willing to part with cash rather than prospects for such a player (or just wait and roll the dice on internal or lesser options first).