Question about MLB vesting options. Does postseason play count for things like IP on vesting options? I assume it does not but now that I think about it, I'm not sure.

 

Also, he's going to cross 200 IP pretty easily this season, which means he could need as few as 180 IP next year for the option to vest (or even fewer if postseason innings count).

 

Unless he gets injured next season and misses five or more starts, we should probably count on him being in a Twins uniform in 2019.

 

 

Unless he gets injured next season and misses five or more starts, we should probably count on him being in a Twins uniform in 2019.

 

Unless Falvine do the right thing and sell high and trade him next off-season

 

Question about MLB vesting options. Does postseason play count for things like IP on vesting options? I assume it does not but now that I think about it, I'm not sure.

 

Also, he's going to cross 200 IP pretty easily this season, which means he could need as few as 180 IP next year for the option to vest (or even fewer if postseason innings count).

 

Unless he gets injured next season and misses five or more starts, we should probably count on him being in a Twins uniform in 2019.

The way I read Santana's contract, it sounds like he has to pitch 400 IP 2017-18, but also 200 IP in 2018.

 

This is from cot's:

 

Ervin Santana rhp
 

4 years/$55M (2015-18), plus 2019 club option
signed by Minnesota as a free agent 12/11/14
15-18:$13.5M annually. 19:$14M club option
2019 option guaranteed if Santana passes physical after 2018 season and throws 400 innings in 2017-18, including 200 IP in 2018

The way I read Santana's contract, it sounds like he has to pitch 400 IP 2017-18, but also 200 IP in 2018.

 

This is from cot's:

 

Ervin Santana rhp

 

4 years/$55M (2015-18), plus 2019 club option

signed by Minnesota as a free agent 12/11/14

15-18:$13.5M annually. 19:$14M club option

2019 option guaranteed if Santana passes physical after 2018 season and throws 400 innings in 2017-18, including 200 IP in 2018

Interesting. Spotrac.com has it worded very differently.

 

"Option Vests with 200 IP in 2018 or 400 IP from 2017+2018"

If he knocks out 200ip next year, that's not a bad 1 year contract in 2019.

 

Interesting. Spotrac.com has it worded very differently.

"Option Vests with 200 IP in 2018 or 400 IP from 2017+2018"

 

 

That certainly could be.  It would actually make a lot more sense from Ervin's perspective.  

After this season, the Twins will keep Santana for '19 anyway unless there is a serious injury.

He has such a smooth and easy delivery and is in such good shape, I could see him being effective for years to come. Like fine wine....

The calls to trade Santana (and Dozier for that matter) are ridiculous.  This team needs to add, not subtract.  Santana, assuming they go out and buy another starter this off season, is a great number 3 starter.  

 

Dozier is another issue and off topic, but with the success this team has demonstrated this year, there isn't really any point to trading him either.

 

The calls to trade Santana (and Dozier for that matter) are ridiculous.  This team needs to add, not subtract.  Santana, assuming they go out and buy another starter this off season, is a great number 3 starter.  

 

Dozier is another issue and off topic, but with the success this team has demonstrated this year, there isn't really any point to trading him either.

 

 

I agree, especially if the Twins make the playoff with this group of players this year.  Even an early exit, if they make the playoffs you don't dismantle it and get new guys in here.  You keep what you have and you add to it, like a starting pitcher and a bullpen arm then you also let the young guys compete for positions so as to create depth.  But you don't start getting rid of the guys helping you win.

The calls to trade Santana (and Dozier for that matter) are ridiculous. This team needs to add, not subtract. Santana, assuming they go out and buy another starter this off season, is a great number 3 starter.

 

Dozier is another issue and off topic, but with the success this team has demonstrated this year, there isn't really any point to trading him either.

Who has been calling for them to trade them recently? Most were last offseason coming off a 100+ loss season. A few left when they looked out of it around the deadline. All totally reasonable considering those circumstances (why hang onto short contracts on aging players that could return prospects, unless you're winning now).

 

Now that they have themselves in a position to make the postseason, and a number of the younger guys look legit, I don't think anyone is seriously saying they should be traded.

Edited September 3, 20179 yr by Darius