How does Haren compare to Santana in the future and also what would it take to get Haren?

I think Haren’s cost is completely up in the air now. Beane will wait to see what the bounty was for Santana, and then dangle Haren as a younger and cheaper option.

Referring to the discussin’ of JS’s postseasons from the last thread:  Didn’t he come out of one playoff game in ‘03 with an injury?  I mean, you can sometimes critique pitchers who do that, but Johann wasn’t out of shape (and gout-ridden) leading to back injuries.

(Not sure whether gout has anything to do with the rest of all that.)

(No offense, if anyone here suffers from gout.

The thing I hate about projections is the baseline regression. I know regression happens, but so many of these projections are the same decline percentage for every player. But not all players are even. Some will decline worse, some will decline better. Why should a guy like Santana or AROD have the same regressions as just an average player. They are stars. They are better than average and will regress better than average.

How does Haren compare to Santana in the future and also what would it take to get Haren?

I’ve got Haren projected to an ERA of 4.08 if he was a Yankee next year.  He had a great year last year, but he plays in a pitcher’s park and his career ERA is 3.82.  He may have turned the corner in 2007, but until we have more data we don’t know it.  He’s also signed for a few years relatively cheaply I think, so I wouldn’t be shocked if his price tag is similar to Santana’s. 

The thing I hate about projections is the baseline regression.

Well, projection systems are inherently limited.  We just don’t know how any individual will age or if they will stay healthy.  It’s just common sense to use a baseline regression component when projecting any player, but it’s just a small portion of their projections going forward.  The single more important factor in any player’s projection is how they have done to that point in their career.  Everything else just builds on that in ways that have been shown to be statistically valid for the overall population of major league players.  They’re conservative by nature because that’s the way player performance trends.  But they’re not absolute and anyone that says they are is not being intellectually honest.

There’s nothing wrong with doing your own back-of-the-envelope projections with whatever factors you want to consider.  But I think it’s important to use some of the ideas behind all projetion systems when looking ahead, instead of the far too common tack of looking at just the most recent season and projecting it out for the next x # of years.  I think that’s the most important thing anyone can take from the work of the various projection systems out there.

Why should a guy like Santana or AROD have the same regressions as just an average player. They are stars. They are better than average and will regress better than average.

But why compare an everyday player to a pitcher? I would assume that a pitcher’s susceptibility to injuries makes them a higher risk for regression and a more fluid projection.

Regarding Haren going forward, I’ve got him being worth 20 WAR through 2014, so seven wins worse than Santana.  Given his likely lower price tag he is probably a better deal.

Ummm . . .  Jack Curry at the NYTimes writes:

“The Yankees have offered a package that does not include pitcher Joba Chamberlain, and they are awaiting Minnesota’s response.”

I also thought we’d have to wait a few weeks on this, but maybe that camp has been wrong.

Man, I hope it’s not Hughes.

Nice, my vibe was right.

Frog, do you have a link?

thanks SG, you are the man.

Can Santana beat Beckett inna game 1 game 4 scenario?
Sebathia?
Hallady?
Carmona?
Verlander?
It’s a crapshoot lad’s.Robby ,Phil, and Mr. the Hutt must be retained.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/28/sports/baseball/28yankees.html?ref=baseball

That would be Halladay.

Just keep sayin: Johan, Joba, Wang, Pettitte, Hughes
Then say: Damon, Jeter, Abreu, ARod, Cano, Posado, Matsui, Giambi, Melky/Action/Betemit/Andruw(?)

I really hope they can get him for IPK, Tabata, and Duncan…or IPK, Action, and Duncan…or anyone but Hughes, Joba, Cano…and Melky just because I like him (but I liked Roberto Kelly too)

I’m not comparing AROD to Santana, I’m talking about the elite players who I think should use some sort of a baseline projection for star players.

”  The single more important factor in any player’s projection is how they have done to that point in their career.”

Alright… so that means Santana has pitched 219+ innings the past 4 years and will suddenly pitch that amount once in his career and only 200+ innings twice more. (I’m not saying the projections say that, but I’m saying that it’s wrong to have that…. if you know what I mean).

You know how replacement players are judged within the position, well I think regression should be judged based on players of similar comparisons.
If your using the same regression tool for everyplayer, it assumes bad players have = regression as great players. However part of what makes a player great is the natural talent and adjustments they make to stay at their level. One would have to assume that their regression also follows this same idea and makes less decline.

One would have to assume that Hughes is included in that package that Curry mentioned, which is rather disturbing.  After all, why the hurry to do all this now - unless Cashman believes getting Santana in the fold immediately will further lure Pettitte to come back for 2008.  Otherwise, the best strategy involves waiting the Twins out like Cashman did with Philly in 2006, when the Yanks were the only real market for Bobby Abreu.

i hope hughes stays. i want to follow his journey to glory. if he goes somewhere, deep inside i’ll be glad to see him go down the drain just so people don’t mock us for giving him up. then again i also want to keep betemit and duncan because our bench is so sweet right now. i just want to keep everyone. let’s just give the Twinkies $400million and a Hostess pastry to be named later. and no Ding Dongs, those are britton’s favorite.

I would think that if a deal was struck quickly, it was because it was considered a steal by Cashman, which maybe means Kennedy?

If Britton would only devour Kyle Farnsworth (whose contract is probably insured), that would save the Yanks a lot of trouble.

The photoshop job that NoMaas has is weirding me out, they had to do a reflection of Kennedy to get the right orientation for him to get off the bus, but it makes him a lefty.  If only you could do that in real life.

You know how replacement players are judged within the position, well I think regression should be judged based on players of similar comparisons.
If your using the same regression tool for everyplayer, it assumes bad players have = regression as great players.

More and more systems are using regression based on some group of similarities so it’s not regressing everyone to the same mean.  So you regress fast centerfielders to one mean, you regress DHs to another, etc.,  For my pitchers I am regressing by age right now, but I am probably going to figure out a way to divide pitchers into groups/bins that are more appopriate.

Let’s take a look at Baseball Reference’s similars for Santana, even though they’re not the best tool for projecting going forward.

For the six retired players, they averaged another eight seasons after age 28, averaging around 27 games, 18 starts, 121 innings, and an ERA of 3.90.  Sure, Santana could pitch 221 innings for the next 10 years, but it’s not the most likely scenario.

Danny Haren is an excellent pitcher, but I just can’t see trading Joba, Hughes, Kennedy, or even Horne to get him.  The Yankees have such a surplus of good, young, right-handed arms at this point, that it doesn’t seem to make much sense to seek out a right-hander of Haren’s caliber.

I would think that if a deal was struck quickly, it was because it was considered a steal by Cashman, which maybe means Kennedy?

Yeah, the Curry article doesn’t necessarily mean Hughes was in the offer.  I’d hope he’s not included, especially so early in the process.

Is Hughes being underrated a little bit?  He pitched a 6 inning no-hitter in his second start, got hurt and had a rough August, then pitched really well in September and against Cleveland.

Hughes is definitely being underrated because of his not very well deserved 4.46 ERA.  I see Joba and Hughes each as potential #1 starters in their own right.

I did look at that and the problem I see is that Santana is clearly the best pitcher there, with an avg ERA+ of 117 while Santana is 141. Also his K/BB rate is so much better, which measures more of a “dominance factor” that the others generally don’t have.
I’m not saying your projections are wrong, but just that there’s so much variance in real life. Also I believe in true talent where one might not regress very much year to year, but suddenly have a very rapid decline as they retire.

Mussina is a top comp. and he basically stayed within career averages until an ERA+ of 98,96,129,87. He basically goes from normal Mussina to suddenly an average pitcher. There is no slight incremental decline for him, and I think that’s more true for the top pitchers. They will be great or “bad” but usually not have many seasons in the middle.

Maddux is another. Goes from 153,136,159 to 108,109,104,109 with no middle decline

That’s too generous man. I think Satana will get significantly worse, actually worse than what’s projected.

I really don’t want Santana at all.  But if we trade Hughes in a deal for him, I will go beserk.

How about a projection for ticket prices.

Sigh.

We want Santana but don’t trade Phil Huggies.

Please.

To make an omelet, you have to break some eggs.

Why do [some] Yankees fans believe they can obtain what is arguably the best pitcher in the game without having to give up at least one ‘A’ prospect? Nice if you can, but why would you as the Twins GM?

I really don’t want Santana at all.  But if we trade Hughes in a deal for him, I will go beserk.

So, how many generations has insanity run in your family? 

—How about a projection for ticket prices.—

Ticket prices are 100% tied into the demand for tickets, not the cost of players.  Any time a team raises ticket prices after getting an expensive player, they use that as an excuse just to avoid the PR hit of raising ticket prices.  Don’t be fooled into thinking that the ticket prices are based on players salary. 

Teams base their ticket prices on what the market will bear (is that the right bear?  bare doesn’t look right).  They set the ticket prices to maximize revenue.  End of story.  Players salary are on the other side of the ledger….as a cost of doing business. 

If the yankees could make money (long term, w/o alienating the fans) by charing 200 dollars a seat, they would….regardless of who’s on the team.

If you are complaining about ticket prices, what you are basically saying is “i’m annoyed that my team is so popular.  i wish they were less talented, so demand would go down”.

Why do [some] Yankees fans believe they can obtain what is arguably the best pitcher in the game without having to give up at least one ‘A’ prospect?

You should read the threads, it’s all in there:
(1) Santana is a FA after the 08 season (obviously) and the Yankees don’t have to make a deal, giving them leverage.
(2) Santana has a blanket NTC which he will only waive if he gets an extension he wants. It’s arguable that the Yankees are the only team that are willing to afford that extension, giving them leverage.
(3) Santana only wants to go to a team with a chance of winning, and it’s been reported that his preference is the Yankees, giving the Yankees more leverage.
(4) Ian Kennedy is not chopped liver compared to guys like Buchholz, who is being mentioned as being requested from the Red Sox. The argument is whether his value is high enough to be the cornerstone of a deal, which I think it is, so long as you send players like Melky to fill current needs that the Twins have.

If this was 3-4 years ago, sure, we should expect the asking price to be a guy like Chamberlain or Hughes or Cano and not be surpripsed. But the scales are tipping and I think it’s possible that Cashman can spin a deal here.

The key question here is whether Santana is willing to sign an extension for what LA, LA of A, or Boston is willing to pay him.  If the answer to that is no or probably not, I can’t see offering much to get him for one extra year. 

If only there were no anti-tapering rules, the clear-cut strategy here would be to hold a press conference saying that the Yankees are planning to offer 160/6 beginning in 2009 if Santana is willing to be patient (and doesn’t get injured).  That should be enough to convince him to turn down much smaller extension offers (although he might take 150/6 to hedge the injury risk, so if that’s a plausible offer, it might take preannouncing a little more).

While the Yankees can’t tamper like that, since we have no connection to Yankee management we can.  So, I hope that Johan is reading this and realizes that the Yankees have the highest marginal revenue product in the league for extra wins if you include appreciation in YES (especially for extra postseason wins, where a #1 starter has disproportionate value) and therefore have every reason to offer more money than anyone else.  For good measure, they have ample payroll flexibility since Giambi, Pavano and Mussina all come off the books next year (among others), and their salaries alone are more than enough to pay even a generous contract for Santana combined with arbitration increases for some of the younger players, without forcing any difficult decisions.

Obviously, I have no credibility trying to talk about what Cashman and Steinbrenner will do, but that doesn’t mean that analyzing what they should do isn’t potentially valuable from the perspective of Johan’s decision.  He has every reason to expect them to be rational in the free agent market (the trade market is murkier, since there are more indirect effects to consider—payroll can be expanded if it will lead to higher revenue, but prospects aren’t similarly elastic, since the draft makes them more difficult to buy for cash, even if there are exceptions related to signability and international prospects).  The Yankees just made an economically rational decision on A-Rod, in spite of some emotional factors which argued against the signing.  With Santana, all the emotional factors are in his favor.  He has a favorable repuation, and what Yankee fan wouldn’t be happy to see the best pitcher in Baseball on opening day in the new stadium if the only cost is an affordable amount of money?  That reaction is worth something to YES, and will probably be considered when making a salary offer.

I really don’t want Santana at all.  But if we trade Hughes in a deal for him, I will go beserk.

So, how many generations has insanity run in your family?  cool smirk

Hughes will be more productive over the next seven years than Santana.  Santana has already begun as slow decline and his historical comps did not pitch well into their 30s.

Nice, my vibe was right.

Your vibe was right because one guy is claiming that the Yankees made an offer?  The Angels reportedly made an offer for Cabrera two weeks ago.  Has he been traded yet?  The Twins are going to talk to several more teams.  It’s in their interest to take their time.  The only way that they would just accept anyone’s opening offer is if that offer was just plain stupid.

Hughes will be more productive over the next seven years than Santana.  Santana has already begun as slow decline and his historical comps did not pitch well into their 30s.

Win now versus win tomorrow.  Yanks have never been good at taking the discount rate and planning for tomorrow.  It’s win now - every year.  The only time they didn’t play “win-now” was when MLB banned Steinbrenner.  The front office took advantage and started building a real franchise.  Hence the 1996-2000 runs.

Best strategy is to wait on Santana until he can be had without giving up good prospects - Twins will relent, just like the Phils did with Abreu, when they learn the only place for Santana is the NYY.

Guys like the Holy Trinity and Jackson are valuable because they are young, projected to be good, and cheap.  You need those guys when building a solid winning franchise, instead of a win-now franchise.

If Twins don’t back down on prospects, then let another team trade their future for a pitcher that will probably begin his regression in a year or two.  And at a bargain price for 20 million/year.

For me, I’ll take younger pitchers whose best days are ahead of them.

Why do [some] Yankees fans believe they can obtain what is arguably the best pitcher in the game without having to give up at least one ‘A’ prospect?

I think some of it depends on what you classify as an “A”.  I don’t think many here are unwilling to give up Tabata.  I know you (Don) aren’t overly high on him, but I think by general consensus he is still considered an “A”.  Is Kennedy an “A”?  I’m sure some consider him an A, others more like a B.  So I think most here are willing to give up one or more of what they consider to be an “A” prospect.  Just not an “A+”, if you will.

Me personally?  I’d be willing to give up Melky, Kennedy, and one other highly ranked prospect not named Chamberlain, Hughes, or Jackson.  More important though than what we rate prospects as is what the Twins rate them as, so…my two guys + they may consider to be A+‘s, or C-‘s. 

As others have pointed out, what the Twins probably want are position players, and the Yankees don’t have many of them.  Maybe a 3rd team gets involved.

According to Pete Caldera, a Yankee beat writer, the Yanks will have to give up either Cano, Hughes or Joba (and that’s just to start) in order to match up with Minnesota.  On the whole, there are so many rumors swirling that it’s difficult to pay much attention - except to get a bit incensed at the prospect of the Yanks trading Cano for ANYONE.  In any event, I believe the Yanks can win now with the team as presently constructed.  Only a deal that improves on that should be considered.  Giving up Cano will not improve the team.

I would think that if a deal was struck quickly, it was because it was considered a steal by Cashman, which maybe means Kennedy?

Patience was never George’s strong suit.  These trade talks and the rumors about them sound a lot more like the actions of a Steinbrenner (albeit Hank) than Cashman so I’m not going to assume that another Abreu-type steal is in the works.

Have I mentioned that projecting pitching is a crapshoot?

This is probably the key to this discussion. The reason I don’t want Boston to trade Buchholz (etc) for Santana is twofold: I have no idea if Santana will win more games than Buchholz over the next 7 years, or even next year. Santana will probably be better in year 1 and Buchholz will probably be better in year 7. But I don’t have much confidence in saying anything more. The other reason I don’t want a trade is that I just think it’ll be more fun watching the kids come up. If I were a Yankee fan, I’d feel the same about Hughes and Chamberlain: if they’re at or near the same level as soon as 2008—again, probably not but you can’t say they won’t—it’d be far more fun to watch them, wouldn’t it?

p.s. The last comment isn’t entirely coherent—it’s directed at all the comments saying Santana is the best pitcher in baseball. Well, is he? He’s had an excellent, consistent record up til now. Chances are in 2008 he’ll be in the top echelon. But guys like Chamberlain, Buchholz… they could join that group pretty soon, just as Santana may be dropping out of it. We’re not talking about pure propsects or known mediocrities; we’re talking about very high-ceiling guys who’ve already shown they can pitch in the Show.

Also, the fact that the Yankee brass believes that Santana is the difference between making the playoffs and reaching the World Series is rather flawed because Hughes and Chamberlain give the team precisely what it’s been missing since 2003 - namely, dominant pitching.

something like 80% of my comments boil down to paraphrasing IE. Except the part where he says the Yankees aren’t evil.

Also, the fact that the Yankee brass believes that Santana is the difference between making the playoffs and reaching the World Series is rather flawed because Hughes and Chamberlain give the team precisely what it’s been missing since 2003 - namely, dominant pitching.

I’d reword that last sentence to say “potentially dominant pitching.”  Hughes and Chamberlain’s dominance is far from certain, especially in 2008.

Like SSF says, Santana’s probably the best pitcher in baseball in 2008.  In 2009, he’ll likely have been surpassed by someone like Jake Peavy. 

So the question is really, go for it all in 2008 at the possible risk of weakening 2009 and 2010.  Given the Yankees’ depth in right-handed pitching prospects, it is probably a risk worth taking.  Something like Kennedy/Melky/Tabata seems reasonable to me if you consider Tabata an “A” prospect, Kennedy a “B”. and Melky as a stopgap who upgrades CF by 2-3 wins in 2008.  The Twins get two position players, one who fills a need right now and one with monster upside.

To me, Hughes, Chamberlain, Jackson and Cano are off-limits. Any other combination of bits and pieces and I’d probably be pretty happy with it.

SG, in that case, you have to really say you don’t want Santana. Just put yourself in the Twins shoes, and think through it: why would you accept such a package being the rival GM? Any one of Cano, Chamberlain and Hughes have to be included. Ortherwise, Twins won’t even consider. They can do better by going to other teams, and they will certainly do better. If Santana does not accept those trades, they are better off keeping Santana for the year, collecting first round draft picks when Santana reaches his payday.

Read my post above yours.  I would like to have Santana, but only at a certain price.  If that price isn’t good enough for the Twins, so be it.

Potentially dominating pitching indeed, although even that is tricky - given how poorly Carmona and Sabathia performed in the post-season this year.  The tantalizing thing about Hughes and Joba is the fact that both have the stuff to completely shut down a team, the way Clemens did against the Mariners way back when.  Whether they actually do that is something else entirely, but even now as both are set to face a season of growing pains, having both in a short series bodes well for the Yanks. 

As for being evil, that’s precisely what makes the Yankees so fun.  Being “the little engine that could” to quote Mr. Lucchino, is a bit too Disney for my taste.

SeattleSoxFan, I don’t like you and you don’t like me but let me ask you a serious question: what would the Sox fan reaction have been on a comparable message board when they traded two “blue-chip, can’t-miss” pitching prospects (Tony Armas and, yes, Carl Pavano) for a small, feeble, injury-waiting-to-happen in Pedro Martinez?  He’s 26 while Johan’s 28 but I think they are comparable.  It was an organization changing move and gave them an ace for 6 years. If Johan begins to tail off when he’s 33 (like Pedro did) then we get 2 years of above average Johan (assuming a 6 yr contract).  I’m not saying trade Joba or even Hughes for him but I’d deal Tabata, Kennedy, or another young unproven player for a sure-thing ace.  We have enough free agents leaving in the next 2 yrs that we should be able to replace the departed prospects quite easily especially if we make a mockery of the draft slot system, as I advocate.

I like you, SSF - just not in “that” way.

Just put yourself in the Twins shoes, and think through it: why would you accept such a package being the rival GM?

Because after one more year of Santana, your guaranteed to lose him in free agency for a couple of draft picks. And mind you, Minnesota is not the type of team that can take, say the #29 pick and a sandwich pick and turn it into Kennedy & Chamberlain, because they tend not to pay much over slot. Both Yankee picks in 2006 were signed for well over slot.

Yeah, the Twins draft well, but what are the chances that the two compensatory picks they get for Santana end up even near the value of Kennedy, Melky, Horne and Tabata? None? Slim?

Would another team be willing to offer a package worth more? If the Twins can find it, good for them. If Boston is unwilling to include Buchholz & Ellsbury, which is what we’ve consistently heard, then it’s not coming from them and therefore Cashman need not panic.

It’s win now - every year.

Absolutely.  And there is an argument to be made that this is not entirely a bad thing.  But putting that aside, it is simply the way things are.  We can debate the merits of various scenarios all we want, but the Yankees are never going to make a conscious choice to not compete for a world championship in any given year in order to put themselves in a stronger position for subsequent years.  At some point, they will miss the playoffs (either despite their win now approach or because of it; doesn’t really matter).  That’s when they’ll rebuild; not a minute sooner.

Example: Johnny Damon’s contract doesn’t look like such a beauty right now, especially if his legs continue to give him trouble for the next two seasons.  But signing him won the division in 2006 AND kept the Red Sox out of the playoffs that year.  A lot of people think that’s worth $50M of someone else’s money.  YMMV.

Bottom line: the Santana trades being rumored aren’t necessarily the best thing for the franchise in the long run, but getting Santana (without giving up Cano or more than one of the young guns) and bringing Pettitte back makes the 2008 Yankees favorites to win the division, the league, and the series.

I think they are comparable.

They’re not, actually.  Although you can argue that Pedro wasn’t really Pedro yet at the time of the trade.

I don’t really like any of you, but while it’s pretty easy to compare Pedro and Santana quickly, its not really a good comparison. Santana has been very good to dominant over the past 4 years, Pedro on the other hand was in his own league. He had numbers that hadn’t been seen since the early 1900s. Simply, trading for Pedro was much less of a controversy than trading for Santana because Pedro was a god of baseball when he was traded, Santana is just very very good.

(1) Santana is a FA after the 08 season (obviously) and the Yankees don’t have to make a deal, giving them leverage.
(2) Santana has a blanket NTC which he will only waive if he gets an extension he wants. It’s arguable that the Yankees are the only team that are willing to afford that extension, giving them leverage.
(3) Santana only wants to go to a team with a chance of winning, and it’s been reported that his preference is the Yankees, giving the Yankees more leverage.

(2) and (3) are purely speculative, which means that (1) is wishful thinking.

Also, the fact that the Yankee brass believes that Santana is the difference between making the playoffs and reaching the World Series is rather flawed because Hughes and Chamberlain give the team precisely what it’s been missing since 2003 - namely, dominant pitching.

Right, and this is why I’d sooner trade Cano than Hughes.  Because a Hughes trade could end up being declining expensive ace for young cheap and on-the-rise ace.  Add Johan to the existing staff to make it dominant, instead of giving him Hughes’ locker.  Moreover, as I’ve said before, if Pettitte returns and you add Johan without trading Joba + Hughes, you have enough horses to move Joba to the pen, which by the way remains the team’s biggest weakness/question mark.

Of course trading Cano would sting.  I’m just saying I can live with a league-average 2B if it means the best rotation in the AL.  There’s enough other guys who can hit the ball.  As I recall, there was a fair amount of bullishness – or at least not-completely suicidal tendencies – at the prospect of a lineup without Arod.

As for 2B replacements, I’ve listed them before.  None would be terribly expensive in terms of players or $: M. Giles, Iguchi, Barfield.  Just to add another element, I don’t think any of these guys would be as big a defensive downgrade from Cano as Matsui would be from Melky.  It’s worth noting that Giles essentially was the Robinson Cano of 2003, posting a .900+ OPS at the age of 25.  So maybe there’s something left in Giles’ tank and maybe Robbie isn’t the next Rod Carew.

Also, because Cano is already a bonafide star, the rest of the package could be relatively modest (Marquez + Vechiowhathisface?).  Perhaps we could keep IPK and Jackson and Tabata (indeed, I wouldn’t consider the trade otherwise).

Now before I become to this discussion what Yatt was to the debate over Arod’s contract, let me qualify all this by saying I’m not advocating offering Cano now.  Like SAS and j, I believe we should use the leverage we have to hold out for a Melky/Kennedy/Marquez-type package –- I honestly don’t believe Boston is serious; Angels will use their chips on MigCab; the Mets don’t have the prospects; and that pretty much leaves the Dodgers who I’d be ok losing out to on Johan’s services.

But if Boston puts Ellsbury or Buchholz on the table and it comes down to brass tacks and the Yankees decide they must have Santana, I say part with Cano before you would Hughes.

In 1994 and 1995, Greg Maddux had an ERA+ of 271 and 262 respectively.  I’d say he was in the same league as Pedro.

Damn you IE, damn you and your stat finding skills. Damn you to hell.

Trading Cano would be absolutely loony.  Cano plays every single day, will be 25 next year, is a fine fielder, a left handed line drive hitter with power and is already the top 2B in the AL.  How can you possibly say that Hughes, who admittedly has lots of upside, is more valuable than Cano, especially considering the depth the Yanks have in terms of RHP and the absolute lack of a replacement for Cano?

And trading Cano is just pure madness.

How can you possibly say that Hughes…is more valuable than Cano…?

Well, I didn’t exactly say that. 

I said IMO Cano/Marquez/Vechionacchi is a better deal than a Hughes-led package, which would probably include Melky plus.

Regardless of what position Cano plays, the Yankees scored 81 more runs than the next best offense in 2007.  The lineup can take the hit, even if you also factor in dropoffs by Posada and Arod.  Beginning as soon as 2010, Hughes will IMO be the better pitcher than Santana.  Considering the difference in salary, he’ll easily be the better value (now I really sound like Yatt).

It’s funny…9 months ago, no one here would’ve traded Hughes for Babe Ruth.  He’s being seriously undervalued, as some others have previously noted.  8 out of 13 quality starts…2/1 K/BB…more than 7ks per 9ip…the 4.46 ERA distorts.

The Giles Bros are two of the most obvious roids/HGH candidates in my opinion.  When do the RedSox- I mean George Mitchel- release the steriod proble news?

And w/respect to all this talk of trading a declining ace in Santana for an emerging ace in Hughes I think some people need to take a step back and be objective.  I’m not in favor of dealing Hughes but think about it like this: if there is a 1/3 chance he’s an ace, a 1/3 chance he’s league average, and a 1/3 chance he doesn’t make it in The Show you can say he’s an average value right now.  If you change the probabilities in favor of him being an ace then he is an above average value now.  Johan is an ACE now and will remain so for at least the next 3-4 yrs barring injury (which is equally likely for both).  Obviously you must consider money and having a slightly inferior pitcher making $20M less makes him more valuable to the organization than the marginally superior pitcher.  Just something to consider when trying to be objective (which I have trouble with as well since I love the home grown players).

Hughes is being undervalued, but He is not more valuable than a middle infielder who is vastly superior to the average player at his position offensively and also is above average defensively. Hughes would play at most 30 something games a year Cano probably at least 130. Both are valuable but Cano contributes so much more, especially as a middle infielder.

I don’t want to trade Hughes away, but, if a gun were put to my head to choose Cano or Hughes to give up the answer would be pretty easy.

I think we can all agree that it’s pretty damned hard to make sound decisions with a gun to your head.

There’s probably a high chance that if all the other players maintan their positions (Ellsbury, Buchholz remain unavailable, for example), that Santana doesn’t get traded at all.  That’s where most of the Yankees leverage comes from, because they’re the team best prepared to sign him if he becomes an outright free agent.

The argument about Cano and Hughes, is flawed, I think, because you’re not taking into account what value each of those guys has to the Yankees specifically. If the package for Santana centered around Cano, and Pettite returns, You’d have a rotation of Santana, Wang, Hughes, Chamberlain, Pettite, Mussina, and Kennedy.  You’re not really getting your “moneys worth” out of Kennedy because of how buried he’d be on the depth chart, while at the same time, you’d be immediately pulling a guy out of the lineup who is young, developing and projects to be our #3 hitter int he not to distant future and for a long time to come.

Trading Hughes makes more sense than trading Cano, but I’d personally rather trade neither, and risk the chance that Boston never changes it’s position with regards to Buchholz and Ellsbury, and Santana either ends up on the Dodgers, Angels (that wouldn’t be so good, but it’d be better than the Red Sox) or stays with the Twins through 2008. In the latter case, this happens again when the trade deadline comes up and we do the whole dance all over again.

Here the question: do we feel more anxiety about who the Yanks may have to trade to Minnesota or more excitement over the prospect of acquiring Santana.  Personally, I’m in the first camp - although neurosis is very much part of my nature.

He’s 26 while Johan’s 28 but I think they are comparable.

i think this is one of the biggest issues with this trade and why so many yankee fans are willing to trade Cano or Hughes so quickly:  they really think Johan Santana is comparable to Pedro Martinez.  and he isn’t.

NOT EVEN CLOSE. 

the situations are not really the same.  Pedro was THREE years younger than Santana and JUST coming off a season MUCH better than Johan’s best season, which was FOUR seasons ago at this point.

those three seasons, Pedro’s age 26, 27, and 28 seasons MADE that trade.

how would it looked if the Yankees were trading Hughes or Cano for Pedro before the 2001 season and giving him a 6 year extension?  it would overall have been pretty disappointing. 

1st year - great, but only 116 innings
2nd year - great
3rd year - great
4th year - OK.  not bad, not worth anywhere close to 25 million.
5th year - good, he was excellent but in the NL, i’d guess in the AL closer to the previous season
6th year - 133 innings of 97 ERA+
7th year - total loss

so for Hughes/Melky + $150M, you would have gotten 2.5 vintage Pedro seasons, 2 OK seasons, and 2.5 extremely disappointing seasons.

is that worth it?  i guess if you win a WS in those first 3 seasons it is.  but overall, trading for Pedro at 29 would not have been “worth” the money and i haven’t even considered what Hughes did over those 6 seasons….

I guess the big question is whether Johan is going to be a free agent next off-season if the Yankees don’t pull the trigger now. 

I think the Twins increase their bargaining power by saying that they are absolutely moving Johan this off-season.  This puts the Yankees in a postion where they know if they don’t put the best offer, they won’t be able to sign him next off-season.  If that is the case and if the Yankees decide they absolutely need Johan, then we’ll see some of our prized prospects playing in Minnesota.

Personally, I’m in the first camp

Same here. A large part of me would just as soon go to the mattresses with what we have. I believe the 2008 Yankees are a couple of solid bullpen arms (which may already exist in the system) and an Andy Pettite away from being a serious WS contender.

i guess if you win a WS in those first 3 seasons it is.

I think that’s only ‘worth it’ if you’re a team that’s going for it in 1 season at the admitted expense of the others.

If the Yankees interest is sustained superior performance, they are better served by only making a deal that does not include Hughes, Chamberlain, Cano, Jackson or Tabata, and even if the deal does not contain any of those guys, not doing a Herschel Walker type trade and sending 6 players over there.

I think the Twins increase their bargaining power by saying that they are absolutely moving Johan this off-season.

This is a double edged sword. On 1 hand, it could scare the Yankees into making sure they are the highest bidder, and on the other hand, if teams are exposes as unwilling to extend Santana’s contract, it could force the Twins to settle for something lower then they wanted.

Regarding the bullpen, José Veras is apparently pitching very well in the Dominican Winter League.  That doesn’t mean he’ll pound the zone next year in the show, as he should, but it’s certainly not bad news.  The main problem for the Yanks’ bullpen is the fact that lots of talent will be ready in 2009, e.g. Melancon, JB Cox, Sanchez if need be, but won’t quite be recovered enough from their injuries to help the team all that much in 2008.

I think we can all agree that it’s pretty damned hard to make sound decisions with a gun to your head.

OK, I’d probably just whimper a whole bunch. But what I’d mean was “trade Hughes before Cano.”

another hypothetical for those willing to trade Cano for Santana:

go back to the 1998-1999 offseason:

would you have traded Jeter for say, Mike Mussina?  assuming we knew at the time Jeter’s true value offense + defense.

I’ve enjoyed all the banter the past few days with the Santana sweepstakes underway. Today’s comments are some of the best. I think I have something to also consider that hasn’t been surfaced so far and that is the state of the Twins organization and how that backdrop could have bearing on their trade demands.  I think it was after the 2001 season that Bud Selig pronounced to the baseball world that there were too many ailing franchises and that contraction might be necessary. To keep this in perspective it was also a time in which the contract was up or nearing the end of such. Anyway, some said it was all posturing, but many people in Minnesota were astonished that Selig said it was time that they have a new ballpark or perhaps they should leave town (or be contracted).  This was a threat taken seriously by the Minnesota people and there was a lot of depression in the front office. Many employees left town, however GM Terry Ryan said he was going to stay and wait it out. Over time the ownership finally responded to moving toward a new stadium though only after much bitter and partisan legislative back and forths as to who should be paying for the new stadium.  Well, the other thing that maybe saved the franchise and created new excitement was the way the team responded with a lot of nobody players.

The timing couldn’ have been better. In essence the team featuring Minky, Hunter, Jacque Jones and others created new optimism and by doing that the state and locals finally have a ball park underway. So what does the history lesson tell us?  The pressure is off and perhaps the need for competing for a title right away. As in Detroit’s case a new ballpark will generate attendance for a while ( maybe 2-3 years) on its own regardless of the quality
of the product which in the Twins case won’t be as drasticly bad now as it sounds. (losing Hunter, Nathan and JS)
I do think Ryan stepped down because he knows he did his job and he knows his star will tarnish lingering because of how conservative Pohlad is. He will work again somewhere if he wants to and for big, big money. He knew that Tori Hunter would open the door to several others going. I think with his leaving that could very well mean that they will not play this quite as smartly or greedily as some may think.  Just my thoughts.

The 1998-1999 Yanks were not short of pitching, so it’s an invidious comparison.  In any case, Cano could very well turn out to be a better player than Jeter - although it’s far too early to make such a pronouncement.

Santana would be a great addition, not only because he’s the best pitcher in the game, but because he provides stability to the rotation. Currently, our rotation consists of 3 guys under the age of 25, who despite their great talent, haven’t pitched many innings. What’s going to happen in August when Mussina’s aches and pains are coupled with 3 young guys who can’t pitch past the 5th inning?

The 1998-1999 Yanks were not short of pitching, so it’s an invidious comparison.  In any case, Cano could very well turn out to be a better player than Jeter - although it’s far too early to make such a pronouncement.

true.  context matters.  but let’s say Pettitte comes back, are the 2008 Yankees “short” of pitching?  Pettitte, Wang, Hughes, Joba, Kennedy, Moose. 

i think that team contends.

how different would that rotation be from the 2007 Blue Jays?  Halladay is a much a better pitcher than Wang obviously, but his 2007 ERA was basically the same as Wang’s.  then they had Burnett, who’s 2007 ERA was about the same as Pettitte’s ERA up until his last start of the season.

then they had 3 rookies. 

the 2007 Blue Jays rotation would have competed if they had the Yankees’ offense.

i guess my point is this:  everyone seems to think the yankees CAN’T go into the season with 3 rookies in their rotation and i guess i am saying, why not?

they have plenty of pieces to make a deadline trade as well.

Why exactly won’t Hughes, Joba or IPK be able to pitch past the 5th inning?  Also, you are forgetting that the Yanks have lots of pitching depth in the organization.  When Mussina’s inevitable aches and pains, if not ineffectiveness, manifest themselves, the Yanks can choose from Alan Horne, Jeff Marquez, Tyler Clippard and Darrell Rasner among others to fill in.  Also, Kennedy at least, is good to go for 200 innings next season.

Why do Hughes’ and Joba’s inning limitations keep getting projected onto IPK?

IPK pitches 160+ innings last year he can bump up to 200ish without undue danger of issue. Even Hughes can probably throw about 180 this year. Its really only Joba who is severely limited by an innings cap, which will probably be around 150.

Plus as IE noted theres a lot of young talent that can be counted on to spot start every once in a while.

And I’ve parroted IE yet again.

SG, one more question:

i remember you once did a calculation that said we should have expected Clemens’ ERA to jump up about .40 runs just from going from Everett to Jeter.

question:  does this projection explicitly account for that?  if not, what is the increase in ERA we’d expect to see moving from Bartlett to Jeter? 

Bartlett lead the AL in ZR, and Jeter was obviously last.

On the other hand, Santana is very much a fly ball pitcher given his repertoire and has a high K rate - both of which will mitigate Jeter’s lousy defense.

Hughes would play at most 30 something games a year Cano probably at least 130.

I find this to be kind of a silly canard.  No player on the field influences the outcome of a game more than a starting pitcher.  Whereas Cano gets roughly 10 percent of the Yankees’ plate appearances.

There’s probably a high chance that if all the other players maintan their positions (Ellsbury, Buchholz remain unavailable, for example), that Santana doesn’t get traded at all.  That’s where most of the Yankees leverage comes from, because they’re the team best prepared to sign him if he becomes an outright free agent.

I think it’s very unlikely he makes it to free agency.  I don’t imagine the Twins want Jim Bowden egg-on-their-face and end up with nothing but draft picks for Johan.  I think they’ll have to settle, or maybe take their chances with a July trade.  Of course, they’ll have even less leverage in July because that will really be their last chance to get something for him.

If the package for Santana centered around Cano, and Pettite returns, You’d have a rotation of Santana, Wang, Hughes, Chamberlain, Pettite, Mussina, and Kennedy.  You’re not really getting your “moneys worth” out of Kennedy because of how buried he’d be on the depth chart…

I disagree.  You think the Yanks wouldn’t have been well-served by being 7-deep in the rotation last spring?  30 games last year were started by someone named Clippard, Wright, Igawa, Henn, DeSalvo or Karstens.  I’m certain Tampa was the only other team that had to turn to a 6.00+ ERA guy for the equivalent of a month.  IPK can start the year in Scranton; more boldly, Joba can go to the pen. 

One of the reasons I’m more protective of Hughes is because if you don’t make your own pitching, you end up taking a bath on Kyle Lohse or Kris Benson.  If Hughes goes, that’s a slot that will have to be filled down the line by making Carl Pavano’s little brother very rich.  A replacement level 2B OTOH is easier to identify and acquire cost-efficiently if need be.

I’d personally rather trade neither [Hughes nor Cano], and risk the chance that Boston never changes it’s position with regards to Buchholz and Ellsbury, and Santana either ends up on the Dodgers, Angels…

I think just about everyone here agrees.  For now, dare Minnesota to find something better than IPK/Melky/Marquez or some comparable package.

Cano could very well turn out to be a better player than Jeter

I think he’s better than Jeter now, though that’s not such a bold statement.

Santana would be a great addition…because he provides stability to the rotation.

Pettitte would also provide stability to the rotation. And the Yankees essentially made the playoffs last year with a rotation of Wang, Pettitte, Mussina and a whole bunch of question marks. This year, the question marks are fewer because we know what the young guys are capable of AND you could still keep the training wheels on as far as innings go. And then there’s still all that depth at AAA.

I don’t know, I’m conflicted on this. On the one hand, it’d be exciting to see Santana in Yankee pinstripes, but on the other, so many people have used Vazquez and Unit and Brown and Wright and Pavano as cautionary tales about needing to develop your own pitching rather than buying it. And now that Cashman and Oppenheimer have done that - developed at least two high-end arms with vast potential that made a ML impact at the age of 21 - we’re talking about unloading one of them, plus more, for the honor of paying one guy $20+ mm a year? It’s highly uncomfortable for me, even knowing who that “one guy” is.

I agree with you, George - although the cautionary tales should be tempered by the fact that the Yanks traded for David Cone, bought El Duque and Mike Mussina and certainly didn’t develop Jimmy Key.  Moreover, neither David Wells nor Roger Clemens were products of the Yanks’ system.  Basically, the only homegrown starter on the 1996-2000 teams was Andy Pettitte.

another hypothetical for those willing to trade Cano for Santana:

would you have traded Jeter for say, Mike Mussina?  assuming we knew at the time Jeter’s true value offense + defense.

For my money, Santana is head and shoulders above any Mike Mussina vintage. 

Looking at it in November 1998, Moose had posted one sub-3.00 ERA, in his first full season (and it’s still his only one).  Santana has done so 3 years in a row, seasons in which he also posted sub-1.00 WHIPs.  Moose had 2 mediocre seasons in his 20s, posting ERA’s of 4.46 and 4.81 in ’93 and ’96 respectively.  Santana’s down year of 2.07, he was still 3.33 ERA/1.07 WHIP.

I’m certain Tampa was the only other team that had to turn to a 6.00+ ERA guy for the equivalent of a month.

You’re wrong.  The Yankees had 29 starts (Igawa, Clippard, DeSalvo, Wright & Karstens) totaling a combined 131.3 IP (AL average is about 5.8 IP/GS) in which they allowed 103 runs, 101 earned for an ERA of 6.92 and an ERA+ of 66.  (Borrowed that from a post by Dag Nabbit over at BTF yesterday).  About half of the teams in MLB get something at least that bad out the dregs of their starting pitching every season.  The things is, the teams in that position generally aren’t contenders.  I’m lifting the following from another of Dag Nabbit’s BTF posts:

Last year the Yanks had a combined starter ERA of 4.57. Let’s look at Detroit, who had the next worst starter ERA of 4.68. (Note: AL starter average was 4.61, so these two squads were right around average). They had 32 starts of 6.27 ERA. That’s really bad, but still not even within a half-run of the Yanks bottom.

Worst: Texas: 5.50 starter ERA. This should be good. 31 bottom feeder starts at an ERA of 6.99. Hey, wait, that’s actually comparable. I’ll be damned. They were just really solidly horrible across the staff.

So, counting the Yankees, that’s half of the AL.  Only two of those teams were any good, and they happened to have the “best” bad starting pitching of the bunch.

Of course the Yankees ticket prices are tied into their payroll. Silly to believe other. While it may not be true for some other teams, it certainly is the case here.

As for runs, A-Freud will not have a similar year, so right there production is off. Posada’s production is also likely to be lower in 2008. So the loss of Cano would hurt more than some might imagine.

Hughes is a nice prospect, Santana a proven commodity. And as others have mentioned, the team has a plethora of RHP in the [f]arm system.

As for Pettitte, if he returns, he is likely not to be as good in 2008 as he was in 2007.

BTW….. I would not give more than a five year extension to Santana.

Indeed.  The fact that Cano will be entering his prime years will certainly help offset some of the decline of A-Rod and Posada.  Aside from Melky, every other Yankees position player is on the wrong side of 30.  That’s why prospects like Austin Jackson and Tabata are so valuable.

Why is there no talk about a deal for haren? it seems a lot more likely that cashman could get something done for haren who still has 3 very reasonable years left on his contract.

What would you trade for Haren? And why are the A’s looking to trade him? Seems odd to me that they’re looking to dump pitching that is signed for several seasons.

Why is there no talk about a deal for haren? it seems a lot more likely that cashman could get something done for haren who still has 3 very reasonable years left on his contract.

I have a feeling Cashman has been banished somewhere.  There’s no doubt that Hank is at the forefront of these Santana discussions.  He wants to make a big splash and Haren doesn’t have the same “wow” factor.  Although, all things considered, Haren is probably a better option.

Why is there no talk about a deal for haren?

Well, no talk from whom?  It was mentioned here lots of times.  Has Cashman called Billy Beane?  I don’t know.  Do you know he hasn’t?

Basically, the Twins have made it (very) public that Santana is available.  Santana has made it public that he wants a lot of money.  And of course there is the NTC.  Also, the Yankees (Hank) have made it public they’re talking to the Twins, so…that’s why everyone is debating Santana.

I may have mentioned this in a different post, but I really think Cashman will wait until Pettitte makes up his mind before going after Santana.  I still think they’ll trade ideas with the Twins, and if the Twins make an offer that is surprisingly low, sure, grab it.  But if Pettitte comes back, the team has enough pitching.

i remember you once did a calculation that said we should have expected Clemens� ERA to jump up about .40 runs just from going from Everett to Jeter.

question:  does this projection explicitly account for that?  if not, what is the increase in ERA we�d expect to see moving from Bartlett to Jeter? 

This projection doesn’t really look at it at the level of detail which I did for Clemens.  I just don’t know if the time needed to look at that buys enough extra information that it’s worth it. I calculate an estimated team BABIP based on my projected zone ratings and playing time for each team then divide that by the league average.  I multiply the pitchers projected BABIP times that # to get their revised BABIP.  In Santana’s case it just shows up as 5 more singles.  2007 PBP data isn’t available yet, but here’s how Santana’s BIP distribution broke down from 2004-2006.

Pos   #    %
1   95   5.5%
2   20   1.2%
3   118   6.8%
4   215   12.4%
5   185   10.7%
6   240   13.9%
7   281   16.2%
8   311   18.0%
9   266   15.4%

So 13.9% of his BIP went to SS.  I’ve got Santana projected to allow 517 BIP in 2008, so assuming the same BIP distribution we’re looking at about 72 chances for the shortstop. If we just use last year’s ZRs, that means Bartlett makes 61 outs, Jeter 55, so there’s a 6 out difference.  Multiply that by .8 (run value of a play not made at SS) and that’s an extra five runs to Santana’s ledger, turning a projected 3.26 ERA to around 3.46.  However, if we go by 2008 projections, the difference shrinks to a 3 out difference and just a .10 difference in ERA.

The Twins defense in 2007 rated like this by zone rating:
1B: +3
2B: -8
3B:  0
SS: +9
LF: +8
CF: +5
RF: -15

So Santana would probably get less defensive support at 1B, SS, and LF, better defensive support at 2B and RF, and similar defensive support at 3B.  CF is a question.  If Melky goes in the deal, then Damon goes to CF and Matsui goes to LF and you have more defensive issues. 

I think an overall BABIP adjustment gets us at least 3/4 of the way to a reasonable take on the hit in moving from one defense to another.  That’s probably good enough.  So the five single difference seems close enough for now, 5 singles times .5 runs per single = 2.5 runs.  If Melky goes and Matsui goes back to LF then I’d have to adjust my BABIP for the Yankees accordingly and it’d impact all the pitchers a little.

Absolutely.  And there is an argument to be made that this is not entirely a bad thing.  But putting that aside, it is simply the way things are.  We can debate the merits of various scenarios all we want, but the Yankees are never going to make a conscious choice to not compete for a world championship in any given year in order to put themselves in a stronger position for subsequent years.  At some point, they will miss the playoffs (either despite their win now approach or because of it; doesn’t really matter).  That’s when they’ll rebuild; not a minute sooner.

Yanks can rebuild while not going totally into the crapper, like the Royals or Pirates.  Yanks have enough money that they can afford to still compete while rebuild.  However, the key is to focus on younger players and not hand out long-term deals to older players.

Frankly, trading a couple of good prospects and Cano/Jackson/Melky for Santana isn’t a step in the right direction.  Santana will want a lot of money over a lot of years in return - and that’s something the Yanks should avoid.

I know many think Santana is God’s personal mixture of Koufax and Carlton, but let’s not forget Santana struggled a bit to end last season.  That to me is a red flag of impending trouble.  You can look at his stats over the past three or four years, but what he did to end last season may be an indicator that he’s starting a decline.

Yanks can compete, and win, the AL East without Santana.  They can probably get to the ALCS without Santana.  By keeping Joba/Phil/Ian, they improve their chances of starting another dynasty in a couple of years.

The chances of another dynasty will be greatly diminished if they ship good prospects for an older pitcher.

I’d also caution that the Yanks need to hold onto as many pitching prospects as possible: they tend to flame out or not reach their potential.  Also, Yanks don’t have many position players coming up, so they may want to focus their money on brining in some bats.

Beane is waiting to see for the Santana business to shake out.  Then he’ll dangle Haren by saying here’s a comparable pitcher at one-third the price…I want more than the Santana haul.

Star-Ledger reporting a rumor that if Melky goes in a Johan deal, Yanks have an interest in Rowand. 

Blech.  Hate it. 

OTOH I do worry a great deal about a Matsui-Damon-Abreu defensive outfield.  Lotsa gappers, not many assists.

it seems a lot more likely that cashman could get something done for haren who still has 3 very reasonable years left on his contract.

Doesn’t the fact that Haren has a nice affordable contract mean there’s no reason for Oakland to trade him?  The reason Santana is available is because the Twins can’t afford him.

You can probably get Haren in two years.  Just like Hudson and Mulder.

And for every Jeter that could have been traded for a Mike Mussina circa 1996 there are plenty of Ruben Rivera’s, Hensley Muelens, Sam Militellos, and even Al Leiter’s who either don’t pan out or pan out much later than you expected and usually with another organization.  Then again, for every Steve Trout and Ken Phelps there is a Jose Rijo and Jay Buehner. 

And w/respect to the Pedro analogy: it may not be fair to compare a stud like Johan to a frail sissy-boy like Pedro who runs away from everyone but old men. Clemens and Randy began to decline aroud 37-39 so, if you go by physical stature, maybe Johan declines when he’s 35 (in between Pedro and Clemens/Randy).