WEEI Rumor: Santana to Red Sox for Coco, Buchholz, Lester

[chacha]

"Ramrod"' date=' isn't that what you will be calling your 4/5 hitters next year after you sign A-Fraud?[/quote']

 

BWAAAAHAAAHAA

 

f***in beautiful!

[RobZombie]

This is crap...I don't know who the new GM of the Twins is but his first move would be trading Johan Santana???...

 

Nope don't see it happening. Nor would I want to trade Clay Buchholz who might be as good as Johan Santana (Hamels like change, Beckett like curve).

 

I have something to say about Jon Lester as well....nobody really understands the cancer treatment he has had to deal with over the past year. This is his first offseason in two years he will be able to workout and strengthen his arm for a full season in pro baseball. He just won the deciding game in the World Series and suddenly we are trading him???

 

Nope just don't see it.

 

People who think that Clay Buchholz is going to walk into the American League and be Johan Santana are likely to be sorely disappointed. It is extremely uncommon for untested pitchers to walk into the AL and dominate no matter how talented. Most struggle for a time before coming into their own. Buchholz might one day be a Cy Young candidate but likely not for a couple of years if it happens at all.

 

Santana on the other hand, is in the prime of his career and is going to walk into Fenway and be one of the best pitchers in the league.

 

The folks at EEI are crazy if they think that the Twins will do it for Crisp, Lester, Buchholz. It would take Ellsbury, Buchholz, and Lowrie or Masterson. Its a lot to give up, but then again you don't get a chance at pitchers like Santana in their prime very often. Consider that he's likely ahead of where Beckett was when the Sox traded for him.

[YAZMAN]

"Ramrod"' date=' isn't that what you will be calling your 4/5 hitters next year after you sign A-Fraud?[/quote']

 

I'll stick with O'Ramwell for 3/4/5.

[Ray10]

All I have to say is not a chance I cannot see this happening and I don't think I will either.

[TheKilo]

People who think that Clay Buchholz is going to walk into the American League and be Johan Santana are likely to be sorely disappointed. It is extremely uncommon for untested pitchers to walk into the AL and dominate no matter how talented. Most struggle for a time before coming into their own. Buchholz might one day be a Cy Young candidate but likely not for a couple of years if it happens at all.

 

Santana on the other hand, is in the prime of his career and is going to walk into Fenway and be one of the best pitchers in the league.

 

The folks at EEI are crazy if they think that the Twins will do it for Crisp, Lester, Buchholz. It would take Ellsbury, Buchholz, and Lowrie or Masterson. Its a lot to give up, but then again you don't get a chance at pitchers like Santana in their prime very often. Consider that he's likely ahead of where Beckett was when the Sox traded for him.

 

Why wouldn't they take Crisp? He's a young, cost controlled CF and fills a need for them.

 

I don't think this trade happens either, but Crisp could be a chip Minnesota looks for.

[BrentD22]

Which ever team gets the single best player in these deals usually is better off. Johan is a better pitcher now and most likely in the future. Maybe he's a little older (but not much).

 

I say do it.

[zackredsox]

I'll be l pissed off if that happens but I realy don't think Theo would do that.

[example1]

Which ever team gets the single best player in these deals usually is better off. Johan is a better pitcher now and most likely in the future. Maybe he's a little older (but not much).

 

I say do it.

 

I'll be l pissed off if that happens but I realy don't think Theo would do that.

 

It won't happen. Not with Buchholz.

 

Probability says to get the best single player in the deal, because a player as good as Santana isn't likely to be found from the minors.

 

Of course, "as good as Santana" takes into account every thing he's done already, not entirely what he'll do from here on out. Personally, I think that only cynics would be willing to move Buchholz (plus other players, mind you) for another pitcher at this point. He obviously has the build and the head for the position, he's a strikeout pitcher, and he will be with the Red Sox until 2013 unless they renegotiate with him or move him. If they sign Santana to a 20m/year, for 5 years, they will have spent 100m on Santana before Buchholz is a FA. That, to me, seems absurd. I can see moving Lester here, or a less developed minor-leaguer, like Masterson or Bowden.

 

I think people aren't realizing what a great couple of seasons Buchholz has had and just how good his stuff is at this age. He has three pitches that are EXTREMELY well developed. His changeup next year will be one of the best in all of baseball. Feel free to call me on that if I'm wrong. I won't be.

 

The Red Sox have a recent history of doing a very nice job predicting which of their prospects will do well. I think they are most excited about Buchholz at this point.

 

I was lambasted before the season started, talking up Buchholz and the fact that Theo said that he was the pitcher with the best stuff of anyone he's drafted (per Joe Castiglione during Buchholz's ST start against the D Rays). At the time, people tried to say that Theo and Crew weren't very good talent evaluators and, frankly, I was stupid for listening to them. Meanwhile, I was talking up Ellsbury (saying he should have been starting the 2nd half of the season), Pedroia (who I predicted would do just fine at the MLB level given his substantial track record) and Youkilis (who many here would happily have traded for a crate of oranges a few months back) in the face of those who thought Theo and Crew were idiots.

 

So, for those of you who think your 'hunches' and 'gut feelings' were enough to justify your disdain for our club's GM, suck it. He won't trade Buchholz because he sees Buchholz as a special talent. The Sox would likely spend the money necessary to pay for Santana, but they would never, EVER give up 2 top-tier (i.e., MLB experienced, knocking on the door with invitation in hand) pitching prospects, for one slightly older but considerably more expensive SP, as well as paying him 20m a year. They would rather overpay by 4 million a year once (if) he hits Free Agency, and chalk it up to paying Buchholz or Lester or Papelbon what they're worth.

 

When Theo talks about spending money wisely, I don't take him to mean "trade away the best pitching prospect the Sox have had in 20 years, a young lefty who throws low-to-mid 90s with good secondary stuff" for essentially a 4-years removed version of the same thing. It is more of a hassle than it is worth, frankly, and the Twins, not the Red Sox, would be getting the better end of the deal with a cheap rotation of, what?, Liriano, Buchholz, Lester, Garza and Bonser (or someone else), totaling somewhere near 2 million dollars.

 

We all know Santana is one of the best pitchers in baseball. We all know that. That doesn't make him infinitely more valuable than other players. Furthermore, just because it isn't likely that another player could come along who has a career as good as Santana, doesn't mean it won't happen.

 

Buchholz threw a dominant NO-HITTER in his second MLB start for crying out loud. His composure is through the roof and, frankly, I'd rather have him right now than Phil Hughes, who is one of the best pitching prospects in a long, long time (given his MiLB numbers, which mirror Buchholz's very closely). Anyone still questioning whether or not Buchholz can be an effective MLB pitcher, or whether his "ace potential" is valid, need to reevaluate your standards for a good pitcher. Simply because he hasn't had a career like Santana's (yet) does not mean it isn't possible.

 

in fact, it is POSSIBLE that he has a BETTER career than Santana. There have been better pitchers in history than Johan Santana. I'm not saying it will happen, but it is possible and certainly with this offense behind him I see no reason that Buchholz can't match Santana in wins, world series rings and cy youngs in the next 10-15 years. Again, go ahead and hold me to it. The kid is really, really good. Absolutely untouchable. The twins should be happy with a Lester, Masterson/Bowden, Crisp deal or no deal at all from the Sox.

 

Red Sox with Buchholz on the mound > Yankees (minus A-Rod) with Santana on the mound

[jacksonianmarch]

Why wouldn't they take Crisp? He's a young, cost controlled CF and fills a need for them.

 

I don't think this trade happens either, but Crisp could be a chip Minnesota looks for.

 

because he has regressed in nearly every facet of his game and he is already costing 5 mil a yr and will be a FA in 2yrs?

[ORS]

because he has regressed in nearly every facet of his game and he is already costing 5 mil a yr and will be a FA in 2yrs?

Were they out of cadavers and needed a volunteer the day they taught the lobotomy procedure?

 

Regressed in every facet? He actually upped his EqA by .007 last year over 2006, and his defense did a complete 180. He was 31 runs better on defense this year. You know, in most definitions of the word, regression means performance gets worse, not better.

 

He was 6 WARP player last year, and about 5 of it was defense, which is unlikely to regress in the immediate future, ie the next 2 years. At $5M, he's a total bargain. For reference, here are the WARP totals for the upcoming FA class.

 

Rowand - 7.7

Hunter - 5.9

Jones - 4.6

Lofton - 3.1

Patterson - 1.2

Cameron - 5.0 (25 game suspension to start the year)

Erstad - -0.3 (WARP does not consider grit)

 

There are others, Curtis Pride, Jeff Davanon, Brady Clark, but it's not worth the trouble to prove my point. Nobody worth looking at on that list will play for less than $10M per, except maybe Patterson if you think he may get a little better.

 

Crisp has more value than people think right now. Hell, if we didn't have Ellsbury, I'd have no problem keeping him with that defense. And, it's not like he hasn't shown the ability to hit better in the past. A little spike in his offense, plus being utilized as a runner more often in the NL, and he's got a shot at a 7.5+ WARP season next year, which is excellent.

[jacksonianmarch]

I meant since his cleveland days

[ORS]

No, you pulled that from your usual idea rectory (pun intended).

[jacksonianmarch]

Yeah, no. I should have added the stipulation comparing his current production to his Cleveland days. He is half the player he was in Cleveland

[ORS]

No, he's 6/6.8 the player. He's just doing it with his glove at a more premium defensive position now.

[Mr Crunchy]

Buchholz threw a dominant NO-HITTER in his second MLB start for crying out loud. His composure is through the roof and, frankly, I'd rather have him right now than Phil Hughes, who is one of the best pitching prospects in a long, long time (given his MiLB numbers, which mirror Buchholz's very closely). Anyone still questioning whether or not Buchholz can be an effective MLB pitcher, or whether his "ace potential" is valid, need to reevaluate your standards for a good pitcher. Simply because he hasn't had a career like Santana's (yet) does not mean it isn't possible

 

i cant argue with any of this till santana gets the ball in a game 7 for the yankees as clay bucholtz watches from his home in johnston rhode island which is a 10 minute commute to pawtucket...

i cant argue with theo's drafting of pitchers and our luck in them staying healthy has also been a blessing...

it wasnt that long ago that we'd draft the next cy young winner only to have him turn catatonic or develop a lust for 15 yr old girls or cut his hand while getting out of bed or blowing an elbow ligament after getting tapped by a soft liner in the wrong place...

 

part of billy beanes so called success is the fact that his big 3 of mulder zito and hudson stayed healthy each year in oakland as did their replacements

uncanny luck with pitching health is huge for obvious reasons.

we finally have pitching depth,we finally have a great farm and we play defense and have a balanced offense.

and i move clay b for santana all day long without looking back

becks and santana would make losing a series of any kind unlikely

both are young enuff where we would have them together thru 2010 and a few more titles

[SchillingIsTheNatural]

People who think that Clay Buchholz is going to walk into the American League and be Johan Santana are likely to be sorely disappointed. It is extremely uncommon for untested pitchers to walk into the AL and dominate no matter how talented. Most struggle for a time before coming into their own. Buchholz might one day be a Cy Young candidate but likely not for a couple of years if it happens at all.

 

I know what you mean.

 

Justin Verlander, Jered Weaver, Francisco Liriano, Jonathan Papelbon, Houston Street, Roy Oswalt, John Lackey, Francisco Rodriguez, etc.

 

There are quite a few pitchers who start off with a bang. I don't believe any of the above players mentioned posted minor league numbers like Clay Buchholz or threw a no-hitter in there 2nd start (other than Verlander none have thrown a no-hitter).

 

Not just that but who cares if he is a Cy Young candidate or not. There are plenty of good pitchers in the league who are not considered for the Cy Young and for the most part its because of the team they play for and the record they have.

 

Clay Buchholz is in Arizona working on strengthening his arm to get ready for the season, not to mention he has the arsenal to compete, and the attitude to deal with the pressure of Fenway and Boston. Last its nice to have a cheap option in the rotation with stud potential while Santana is here for a season before he cashes in and we owe more money where we might not need to.

[example1]

 

i cant argue with any of this till santana gets the ball in a game 7 for the yankees as clay bucholtz watches from his home in johnston rhode island which is a 10 minute commute to pawtucket...

i cant argue with theo's drafting of pitchers and our luck in them staying healthy has also been a blessing...

it wasnt that long ago that we'd draft the next cy young winner only to have him turn catatonic or develop a lust for 15 yr old girls or cut his hand while getting out of bed or blowing an elbow ligament after getting tapped by a soft liner in the wrong place...

 

Given the amount of time spent on this site dissecting pitch counts and pitching plans for seasons (i.e., Buchholz cannot pitch more than 170 IP, Papelbon can't throw more than 75 ip, or whatever) I am hesitant to call pitcher's health "luck". Certainly luck has played a part of it, but the Red Sox were not banking on "luck" to keep Beckett's blisters from rearing their ugly head, and Papelbon's shoulder strengthening program wasn't "luck" either.

 

That said, would Santana getting the ball in game 7 really scare you that much? I mean, this is a team that knocked around John Lackey, Jared Weaver, Fausto Carmona and Cy.C Sabathia on the way to the playoffs. They regularly knock around good pitchers. I think I remember the same argument being used about why we shouldn't have let Damon go to the Yankees ("we don't want to see THAT lineup in the playoffs"). I just don't think it's that big a deal, and certainly wouldn't throw away premier young pitching on an already good team simply to keep the Yankees from getting their game 7 pitcher.

 

part of billy beanes so called success is the fact that his big 3 of mulder zito and hudson stayed healthy each year in oakland as did their replacements

uncanny luck with pitching health is huge for obvious reasons.

we finally have pitching depth,we finally have a great farm and we play defense and have a balanced offense.

and i move clay b for santana all day long without looking back

becks and santana would make losing a series of any kind unlikely

both are young enuff where we would have them together thru 2010 and a few more titles

 

You will be changing your tune when you realize how good Buchholz is and how foolish it is to look for a 15% short-term improvement from Buchholz to Santana, for 70 times the salary. I wouldn't complain if the move happened, but I'm not going to be pissed if they're not willing to trade Buchholz.

 

Would you be willing to trade Buchholz for other top-tier pitchers, or only Santana? I mean, if Jake Peavy or Brandon Webb became available would you move all of your prospects for them too? To me there comes a point where you're really just trading away "unknown" talent (unknown to those who don't pay attention) for "known" talent. I watch Peavy and Webb and don't see that their stuff is so that much better than Buchholz.

 

I feel like the patience I preached about Pedroia and Ellsbury has been vindicated and I would be willing to bet the Sox would trade either of those guys before they move Buchholz. Buchholz will be at least as good as Dice-K was this year as a rookie, and could very well have better stuff in the future.

 

My point isn't that they shouldn't get Santana. My point is that the difference between Santana and Buchholz isn't as big as most people think and that people always tend to think the grass is greener on the other side. There is nothing about Buchholz that turns me off. Nothing. He has gas. He has a Cole Hamels-esque curve and a Santana-esque changeup. Not only could he be a very good MLB pitcher, he could be a GREAT MLB pitcher. He's only been pitching for 6 years or something!! Amazing.

 

If you're going to trade Buchholz, it better be for Santana, but even then I would rather have a homegrown stud as our #3 and spend our money filling out Manny's lineup spot or getting another SP in the future.

[Paradisecity]

Comparing the success rate of the growth of highly touted position prospects compared to pitching prospectswould bring some value (or, in my opinion take away some value from) your argument.

 

Everyone is the next Santana, the next Pedro. And yet, there is one Santana, and there is one Pedro.

 

Its a lot easier for great position prospects to succeed, again, in my opinion.

[example1]

Comparing the success rate of the growth of highly touted position prospects compared to pitching prospectswould bring some value (or' date=' in my opinion take away some value from) your argument. [/quote']

 

Why would I look at aggregate statistics when I could look at the players themselves? We're not talking about "any" minor leaguer here, in terms of whether or not it is always wise to trade an unproven minor league pitcher for a proven major league one. We're talking about specific players. What you would want to look at is the success rate for pitchers who were proportionally as good as Buchholz.

 

In other words, you want to find out how much better Buchholz was than the aggregate hitters he faced in the minors and see how pitchers who have had that level of dominance have fared in their MLB careers.

 

Everyone is the next Santana, the next Pedro. And yet, there is one Santana, and there is one Pedro.

 

Its a lot easier for great position prospects to succeed, again, in my opinion.

 

Yeah, there's only one Santana, but what is the value of a Santana over Justin Verlander? What is the value of Santana over Brandon Webb? What is the value of Santana over Jake Peavy? What is the value of Santana over Beckett? How about Wang?

 

I think there is a difference, but is that difference the career value of Jacoby Ellsbury, Michael Bowden, Justin Masterson (who some Red Sox officials are extremely excited about) and/or Coco Crisp? It's not a no-brainer.

 

There is reason to think that between Lester, Masterson and Bowden there will be at least one very good major league starter, with the potential for two.

 

Furthermore, why give up all those prospects when you could go get Santana for money alone (which you would have to pay him anyway to keep him)? If the Yankees trade Wang and Kennedy and Cabrera to get Santana then that's fine.

 

Here are the good pitchers who are available after the 08 season for nothing but money (some have options):

 

A.J Burnett (32)

Rich Harden (27)

John Lackey (30)

Jake Peavy (28)

Brad Penny (31)

CC Sabathia (28)

Ben Sheets (30)

 

I imagine that a few of these guys will hit the market rather than resigning or signing with a trading partner.

 

Is Johan Santana worth more than Jake Peavy + Clay Buchholz + Jon Lester + Coco Crisp? Is he worth more than Sabathia + Lester + Buchholz + whatever other minor-league player everyone on the 'this is a no-brainer' bandwagon want to throw in there? Personally, I think the team would be better off with BOTH jake Peavy and Clay Buchholz rather than just Johan Santana.

 

So, yes, it's nice to be Johan Santana, as there is only one of him. However, sometimes NOT being Johan Santana makes you more affordable in terms of having to give up premier talent and money.

 

I think that is a pretty good FA class when you're looking for a 2nd or 3rd starter and an 09 rotation of Beckett, Peavy, Matsuzaka, Buchholz and Lester seems pretty sick.

 

In the past young premier starting talent has been almost unattainable on the FA market. The top line simply SPs haven't been available. After the 2008 season, there will be such talent on the market and the Sox FO is certainly aware of that.

 

There's a tendency around here to go after the first shiny object that goes floating past, rather than waiting for the real financial and long-term gems.

[BSN07]

I too would rather sign for money Peavy/Sabbathia/Harden/Lackey and keep Buccholz and the other minor leaguers then just have Santanna.

[RobZombie]

I know what you mean.

 

Justin Verlander, Jered Weaver, Francisco Liriano, Jonathan Papelbon, Houston Street, Roy Oswalt, John Lackey, Francisco Rodriguez, etc.

QUOTE]

 

Half of those guys were closers. Obviously its easier to come into the majors and dominate as a closer than as a starter.

 

Liriano never pitched a full year in the majors, Oswalt pitched in the national league, John Lackey didn't post a full year sub 4 ERA, until his third year in the majors and Weaver still hasn't pitched 180 innings in the big leagues. Verlander while probably the best guy on your list, isn't really in the same class as Santanna and certainly wasn't dominant.

 

If Santanna comes here he gives you 200+ innings and a sub 3 ERA easy. Compare that to Buchholz who MIGHT give you a 3.50-4.00 ERA. That by the way what Verlander has done in two years in a pitchers park. Sometimes even excellent pitchers have growing pains in their first go round in the AL East as Matsusaka and Beckett did.

 

If it were a choice of a guy who might one day be really really good and a dominant pitcher in his prime, the choice is really very very simple. You would trade Buc for Santanna straight up any day of the week.

 

Then the question becomes if you also want to give up your above average young CF and another B level prospect.

[RobZombie]

I too would rather sign for money Peavy/Sabbathia/Harden/Lackey and keep Buccholz and the other minor leaguers then just have Santanna.

 

First off there is NO guarantee that you have a chance at any of these guys. Since they are on the open market, they might cost more than Santanna in terms of money too.

 

Also, I'd rather have Santanna the other guys you mentioned. Peavy is a good pitcher but most of his career has been in the NL in an extreme pitchers park. Harden and Sheets have serious injury issues, and Sabbathia was good this year but doesn't have nearly the long-term track record that Santanna does.

 

I'm sure many were saying the same thing about Pedro Martinez or Josh Beckett before they were traded to Boston. Why trade prospects when we can get something a little less for no more than money? With Pedro, the prospects turned out to be mediocre players and with Beckett, well you can see how valuable a dominant pitcher is in the playoffs. Where would the Sox be today had they signed Burnett and not traded for Beckett? Jorge DelaRosa looked pretty good before he was traded for a 37 year old pitcher and where is he today?

[castigs850]

Buccholz and Lester is too much on our side to give up along with coco crisp. i would do it in a heartbeat for buccholz and coco, or even lester and ellsbury. Of couse i would much prefer to keep buccholz and ellsbury while still getting Santana. So how about Lester Masterson/Bowden (or both) and crisp. Anyone think any of those three trades have a chance of happening rather than Buck/Lester/Coco

[a700hitter]

Ellsbury is the keeper. I trade Bucholz, Lester and Crisp in a heartbeat for Santana. Santana is one of the top five pitchers in the game and he's in his prime. We could only dream that either Bucholz or Lester become 75% of what Santana alreay is. Crisp is a 4th outfielder. This deal is a no brainer. The Sox would have to make this deal.

[SchillingIsTheNatural]

Sometimes even excellent pitchers have growing pains in their first go round in the AL East as Matsusaka and Beckett did.

 

And you are assuming Johan Santana wouldn't have growing pains?

 

Something to keep in mind with Santana....2004 was his coming out season. Since then his numbers have been great...2007 was a little different (although still dominated)

 

Wins went down

Losses went up

IP went down

Ks went down

ERA went up

BB went up

HRs allowed went up

 

perhaps a trend is beginning?

[SchillingIsTheNatural]

Last thing I want to throw out there....a comparison of the two players last season in Minor League Baseball

 

Santana

Single A-Michigan, 8-8, 160.1 IP, 4.66 ERA, 55 BB, 150 K

 

Buchholz

AAA-AA Combined 8-5, 125.1 IP, 2.44 ERA, 35 BB, 171 K

 

It does not mean he will be better than Santana but its something interesting to look at.

[RobZombie]

And you are assuming Johan Santana wouldn't have growing pains?

 

Something to keep in mind with Santana....2004 was his coming out season. Since then his numbers have been great...2007 was a little different (although still dominated)

 

Wins went down

Losses went up

IP went down

Ks went down

ERA went up

BB went up

HRs allowed went up

 

perhaps a trend is beginning?

 

Yes I am assuming that Santanna won't have growing pains. He's already pitching well in the AL. Matsusaka and Beckett did not pitch in the AL prior to arriving in Boston.

 

Keep in mind that Santanna had a sub 3.00 ERA and was on-par as far as all the other stats through August. I don't know if he had an injury or not, or just wasn't as competitive in games that were basically meaningless.

 

Nothing is guaranteed, but I'd bet on Satanna having a sub 3 ERA if he pitches in Boston next year.

[RobZombie]

Last thing I want to throw out there....a comparison of the two players last season in Minor League Baseball

 

Santana

Single A-Michigan, 8-8, 160.1 IP, 4.66 ERA, 55 BB, 150 K

 

Buchholz

AAA-AA Combined 8-5, 125.1 IP, 2.44 ERA, 35 BB, 171 K

 

It does not mean he will be better than Santana but its something interesting to look at.

 

It doesn't mean much to me at all. There is nothing in Santana's minor league statistics that tells you he was a future ace. When did Santana develop his change up? He certainly became an ace in a very unique fashion.

[a700hitter]

Nothing is guaranteed' date=' but I'd bet on Satanna having a sub 3 ERA if he pitches in Boston next year.[/quote']He's a proven dominant ace. That is the rarest breed of professional athlete.

[SchillingIsTheNatural]

Yes I am assuming that Santanna won't have growing pains. He's already pitching well in the AL. Matsusaka and Beckett did not pitch in the AL prior to arriving in Boston.

 

Keep in mind that Santanna had a sub 3.00 ERA and was on-par as far as all the other stats through August. I don't know if he had an injury or not, or just wasn't as competitive in games that were basically meaningless.

 

When a guy has a tough second half like Johan Santana did, wouldn't you think that would raise a red flag? His numbers dropped a bit after the all star break where he is usually unbeatable. Would you still trade for him when injury could be a question? Sure I would...but not Clay Buchholz.

 

 

It doesn't mean much to me at all. There is nothing in Santana's minor league statistics that tells you he was a future ace. When did Santana develop his change up? He certainly became an ace in a very unique fashion.

 

What does it say about Buchholz when he has developed his change in one season? Not just developed but made it a dangerous weapon to go with his other pitches which are just as good.

 

My biggest issue is once Clay Buchholz is gone...he won't come back. Every team in baseball wants the guy. Johan Santana will be available again. He will be a free agent and rake in the money. If we want him then...I'm fine with that and we could have Johan Santana and Clay Buchholz.