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

[RobZombie]

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

 

 

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.

 

A couple of issues here. Santanna fell off during the final month of the season not the entire second half. Up until September 1st he had an ERA under 3.00. During the final month Santana was pitching in meaningless games for the first time and had openinly expressed his displeasure in doing so.

 

Sure Santana might be a free agent again, but if the Twins trade him, its likely he will not be. Plus, in the free agent market, Santana will cost you a lot more than he will during the four day negotiating window.

[ksushi]

Pretty sure this rumor was squashed. I believe it was Gordon Edes speculating what it would take to get Santana and then it got called into EEI as a proposal the twins made to the Sox. No way would the Twins approach the Sox with a direct trade proposal. Maybe a call to let them know he is available, but not a proposal like this and this doesn't seem like something the Sox would offer.

[Mr Crunchy]

why anyone here has the courage to compare clay bucholz to carlo santana is beyond me

1 guy has 1000ks 2 cys and 70 wins in 4 years

the other guy didnt make the post season roster.

 

lackey carmona sabbathia weaver,none of them have been as good as johan santana over the last few years,this year santana got off to a s***** start and didnt have a good year by his standards.

santana,in his off year,won 15 with 230ks and a 3.33 era and 219ip. and an a.l leading whip of 1.2?...

hes 28

put him in a rotation with becks dice and lester with paps at the end or even moving paps to the rotation and spending money on a closer and you a recipe for a dynasty.

mix up the rotation anyway you like for its going to be awesome,as good as we've seen in the al......

we're talking a 28 yr old lefty here

not a 38 yr old wells or 40 yr old johnsons or clemens or a 41 yr old schilling

a 28 year old lefty......with 2 cys 200ks and 70 wons in 4 yrs on a 3rd rate team...

 

nobody knows what clay bucholz is going to be.

we can think we can hope we can speculate

nobody knows for sure.

like my sainted grandmother used to say

""s*** in 1 hand and hope in the other,see what fills 1st""

i predict great things for bucholz,i dont have to predict with santana.

of course we and many of the experts all think hes a nice pitcher with superstar potential

but with santana you already have the superstar....

its a no brainer if you can afford him

we can afford him and we have the bait to get him in boston.

 

that being said

i will not hold my breath waiting for this to happen

i am more likely to get a blow job from jessica alba.(you reading this babe??)

i am simply hot for a lefty superstar,something we havent had since dr jim the dentist decided to be a skier.

[carltonfiskga]

Correction, Dr. Jim was a right hander.

 

Only lefty's we had in 30 years that may have been a #2 starter were Hurst or Bill Lee.

[example1]

why anyone here has the courage to compare clay bucholz to carlo santana is beyond me

1 guy has 1000ks 2 cys and 70 wins in 4 years

the other guy didnt make the post season roster.

 

Buchholz actually plays a pretty mean version of Black Magic Woman, but he hasn't been able to collaborate with Rob Thomas so he still lags behind Santana a bit there...

 

lackey carmona sabbathia weaver,none of them have been as good as johan santana over the last few years,this year santana got off to a s***** start and didnt have a good year by his standards.

 

Which indicates to me that you didn't read my posts very well. The following pitchers are available after NEXT season: Peavy, Santana, Sabathia, Bonderman (and some others)

 

Is Santana worth more than Peavy + Ellsbury + Buchholz. No. He is not. So by trading those two and not being willing to enter the FA market for pitchers, you are saying that you would trade Buchholz + Ellsbury + any one of those pitchers (who will be cheaper and who are just as young if not younger than Santana) for Santana. I wouldn't, the Red Sox wouldn't. I'm not crazy for that, I'm just capable of seeing more in the strata than simply seeing it as Santana and then everyone else.

 

santana,in his off year,won 15 with 230ks and a 3.33 era and 219ip. and an a.l leading whip of 1.2?...

hes 28

put him in a rotation with becks dice and lester with paps at the end or even moving paps to the rotation and spending money on a closer and you a recipe for a dynasty.

 

Or... you could add the leagues best pitching prospect, who struck out more than 1 per inning, who put up better minor league numbers than Oswalt, Santana and Peavy, who threw a no-hitter against a division opponent, into the rotation, behind a lineup coming off a WS victory, with star talent like Manny and Ortiz, plus more-than-adequate fill-ins like Pedroia, youkilis and Ellsbury (each for 400K per season) and you have the makings of a dynasty.

 

 

mix up the rotation anyway you like for its going to be awesome,as good as we've seen in the al......

we're talking a 28 yr old lefty here

not a 38 yr old wells or 40 yr old johnsons or clemens or a 41 yr old schilling

a 28 year old lefty......with 2 cys 200ks and 70 wons in 4 yrs on a 3rd rate team...

 

Yep. He's done all that stuff.

 

nobody knows what clay bucholz is going to be.

we can think we can hope we can speculate

nobody knows for sure.

like my sainted grandmother used to say

""s*** in 1 hand and hope in the other,see what fills 1st""

 

Did your grandmother ever s*** a no-hitter on her hand? Have you actually watched BUchholz pitch? i

 

People that are speculating that he will be a very, very good pitcher aren't simply guys like me. It includes guys like Theo Epstein, Jason Varitek, Mike Scocia (and numerous Angels hitters), the Red Sox announcers, the Baltimore announcers, and any announcer, coach or trainer that has seen Buchholz in the minors. It's true that nobody can know for sure, and its a good thing that only holds YOU back, because otherwise you would trade very prospect we have. The stats say he will be a star. The scouts say he will be a star. Usually, when those two add up, and the guy goes 3-1 with a 1.59 ERA with 22 Ks in 22 IP, there is reason for non-blinded optimism.

 

You wouldn't be saying this stuff if Buchholz had had just ONE good season, say, like the one Francisco Liriano (unproven though he was) had two seasons ago. Would you trade a healthy liriano and Ellsbury for Santana? If you would I'd say you're crazy. Do you think its a good idea to trade Buchholz for Josh Fogg? I mean, we KNOW what we're getting with Josh Fogg. Buchholz could actually be a cyborg, sent here to confuse us. Perhaps Buchholz isn't actually a pitcher at all, maybe he just fooled us into thinking he was one. ********. Your reasoning (he hasn't pitched in the majors yet, so we don't know what he'll be like) is putting such little faith in the Sox ability to judge talent that it is embarrassing.

 

i predict great things for bucholz,i dont have to predict with santana.

 

Really? Then what were Santana's 2008 and 2009 stats like? It seems to me like whether a player is established or not you're still making a PREDICTION when trying to figure out a guys' future value.

 

of course we and many of the experts all think hes a nice pitcher with superstar potential

but with santana you already have the superstar....

its a no brainer if you can afford him

we can afford him and we have the bait to get him in boston.

 

The experts have all already used the word "superstar" to describe the possible future for both Ellsbury and Buchholz. It is nearly impossible for either of them to have shined any more than they have in their time with the Red Sox. Neither gives any indication of being a "flash in the pan". Personally, I would think that Santana's 4 consecutive seasons of nearly 220 IP would possibly raise the idea that it wouldn't be totally wise to spend all those prospects on a guy who has already thrown that much.

 

For every "he hasn't proven himself" comment you make I will respond with "he's thrown 1000 IP in the past 4 years, is older and will cost 20m a season once he gets his way, probably after testing the free agent market".

 

that being said

i will not hold my breath waiting for this to happen

i am more likely to get a blow job from jessica alba.(you reading this babe??)

i am simply hot for a lefty superstar,something we havent had since dr jim the dentist decided to be a skier.

 

Why the hell do you care about a lefty superstar? What difference does it make?

 

Overall, I find it funny how many people call ANY move to get Santana a no-brainer, but then they can't justify why it is a no-brainer. The thinking around here seems to be that ANY amount of prospects, no matter who they are or what they have done, is worth trading away for someone who has MLB experience.

 

This is a group that would happily trade Andrew Miller and Cameron Maybin for Jamie Moyer.

[SchillingIsTheNatural]

example1....excellent post

 

You hit on everything that needs to be mentioned when discussing these trade possibilities. Some people on this site need to not be so short-sighted.

 

If the Red Sox do nothing more than resign Mike Lowell, they are the favorites to win the World Series again. The front office has worked hard to get the team to this position. Lets not trade away all that hard work for a quick fix that we may not be able to keep. We can keep the young kids who have done nothing but perform to this point.

 

Theo Epstein is getting himself in a position that when he trades, he moves players he has a surplus of talent in a particular position. David Murphy was burried on the depth chart which made him expendable. Kason Gabbard was capable of being in the rotation but with Jon Lester and Clay Buchholz making there ways to the rotation, he was expendable.

 

Coco Crisp is at a point where he can bring in something of value. No matter what anyone wants to say about his offense...the kid is arguably the top defensive CF after the 2007 season. Plenty of teams are interested in Crisp and Epstein will find something of value for him to help improve this team.

 

Outside of Alex Rodriguez coming to Boston I just don't see this team making any crazy moves. They won the World Series and have all the pieces in place (besides Mike Lowell) to make another run. Not just for next season but several seasons.

[example1]

example1....excellent post

 

You hit on everything that needs to be mentioned when discussing these trade possibilities. Some people on this site need to not be so short-sighted.

 

If the Red Sox do nothing more than resign Mike Lowell, they are the favorites to win the World Series again. The front office has worked hard to get the team to this position. Lets not trade away all that hard work for a quick fix that we may not be able to keep. We can keep the young kids who have done nothing but perform to this point.

 

Theo Epstein is getting himself in a position that when he trades, he moves players he has a surplus of talent in a particular position. David Murphy was burried on the depth chart which made him expendable. Kason Gabbard was capable of being in the rotation but with Jon Lester and Clay Buchholz making there ways to the rotation, he was expendable.

 

Coco Crisp is at a point where he can bring in something of value. No matter what anyone wants to say about his offense...the kid is arguably the top defensive CF after the 2007 season. Plenty of teams are interested in Crisp and Epstein will find something of value for him to help improve this team.

 

Outside of Alex Rodriguez coming to Boston I just don't see this team making any crazy moves. They won the World Series and have all the pieces in place (besides Mike Lowell) to make another run. Not just for next season but several seasons.

 

Oh, but let's give it all away so we can finally have a "superstar", a celebrity on this team!! I want some STAR power on the Red Sox, not these weak rookies.

[jacksonianmarch]

example, in Crunchy's defense, f***ing Bud Smith also threw a No no as a rookie and his only claim to fame is being included in the Scott Rolen deal. Crunchy has the win now attitude and I think it is apt for you guys. The Yankees wont be down for long. They may be down for 1-2 hell even 3 yrs. But if they do it right, there arent many teams that can take em. That being said, the sox have the best team in the game and the chance to nab the best pitcher in the game. If you got Santana, you'd be the favorites to win not just one more, but 2-3 more championships before the yankee juggernaut rebuilds (and if you look at history, you know it will eventually rebuild). Imagine being able to say that you won 4 championships in a decade, the only other team to do that was the Yankees. Having 4 chamionships this millenium compared to none by the yankees. Getting Santana almost guarantees that. Now Buchholz may be better than Santana, he may not be. But Santana is young and worth it. Plus, for us, we dont have an ace, so dealing a potential ace will hurt more. You guys already have one in Beckett. So dealing a kid doesnt hurt as much when you still have your hammer. If you have the shot, you take it.

[SchillingIsTheNatural]

example' date=' in Crunchy's defense, f***ing Bud Smith also threw a No no .[/quote']

 

Anyone who has seen Bud Smith and Clay Buchholz pitch is not going to get them confused. They both threw no hitters but its clear who will have the better career.

 

I also feel the Red Sox can win championships with the team they have right now. Perhaps the Yankees will be back but the Red Sox can't worry about that. They need to continue doing what they have been doing and building from within. The moment we start dealing them away and paying huge salaries for older players...the sooner we become the Yankees of 2004-2005-2006 etc. You want to be like the Yankees of the late 90s.

[jacksonianmarch]

The Yankees of the late 90s put proven veteran pitching at the top of their wish list. When your rotation reads like a bunch of future HOFers or borderline HOFers all in their prime, then you are doing something right.

 

96- Pettitte and Cone in their prime

97- Wells, Pettitte and Cone

98- El Duque, Wells, Pettitte, Cone

99- Clemens, Cone, Pettitte, El Duque

00- Clemens, Pettitte, Duque, (Cone sucked)

 

when you have 2-3 bona fide aces in your rotation and the best closer in history backing you up. And the bridge is loaded with 2-3 guys who would be closing on any other team, then life is goooood.

[jacksonianmarch]

Lets just say you dealt Buchholz and Ellsbury for Santana this yr. Just put it out there.

 

That leaves you with a rotation of...

 

1. Beckett

2. Santana

3. DiceK

4. Lester

5. Wakefield or Schilling

 

If you assume that DiceK is likely to get a bit better as he gains stamina, then that rotation will f***ing dominate. Who cares if Buchholz gets to grow in the tundra/baggy of Minnesota. That rotation would f***ing dominate.

[YAZMAN]

when you have 2-3 bona fide aces in your rotation and the best closer in history backing you up. And the bridge is loaded with 2-3 guys who would be closing on any other team' date=' then life is goooood.[/quote']

 

Kinda like how the Sox won the World Series this year?

[Jayhawk Bill]

They may be down for 1-2 hell even 3 yrs.

 

Or even 86 years...who knows? :dunno:

 

example1....excellent post

 

You hit on everything that needs to be mentioned when discussing these trade possibilities. Some people on this site need to not be so short-sighted.

 

Almost everything...one could discuss the value of arb years and, especially, pre-arb years in more depth...and on jacksonianmarch's side, one could point out that signing Type "A" free agents can cost us draft picks. Still, I can't quibble with example1's conclusions here, either.

[jacksonianmarch]

Kinda like how the Sox won the World Series this year?

 

you had one ace this yr. Paps is not even close to Mo in his prime. And if Delcarmen continues to develop, then yea, you will have a bridge similar to the late 90s yanks.

[example1]

you had one ace this yr. Paps is not even close to Mo in his prime. And if Delcarmen continues to develop' date=' then yea, you will have a bridge similar to the late 90s yanks.[/quote']

 

What the f*** does this mean? By what measure? I mean, Papelbon didn't blow any saves down the stretch. He didn't give up a run in the playoffs. That's like saying that the number 1,203,405,038,403,305,058,038,125,342,122 is no where CLOSE to the number 1,203,405,038,401,305,058,038,125,342,122. I mean, if there is no difference in output (i.e. runs scored) and if hitters are just as scared to face him (they are, listen to them) then there is no substantive difference. Perhaps Mariano Rivera in his prime could have struck out Babe Ruth 100 times out of 100, I don't know, but I do know that in terms of production neither could have done much better than they did.

 

I'm sure you noticed that Papelbon's WHIP the past two seasons (.776 and .771) are both better than any season Rivera had, right, as Mo's best was .86. I'm sure you looked at that before you made your post.

 

So yeah, I guess Rivera was better because he let more runners on base.

 

At the age of 26 Papelbon has 72 saves. At the age of 26 Rivera had... 5.

[jacksonianmarch]

Mo did it in many postseasons. Paps has done it in one.

[YAZMAN]

you had one ace this yr. Paps is not even close to Mo in his prime. And if Delcarmen continues to develop' date=' then yea, you will have a bridge similar to the late 90s yanks.[/quote']

 

Yeah, Okajima really sucked this year. And as for Papelbon, he may not have Mo's numbers yet but he certainly does remind me of that 90's dominance that a younger Rivera had. Remember, he was 27 before he started closing for NY. Look at what Papelbon has already accomplished at an age where Rivera hadn't hit his stride yet.

[jacksonianmarch]

I am conceding that you guys are built to win multiple championships. Acquiring Santana would cement a few more in the short run and seeing as he is 28, it does some good things for the long run too. Today is another one of those dickpunch days.

[example1]

Or even 86 years...who knows? :dunno:

 

 

 

Almost everything...one could discuss the value of arb years and, especially, pre-arb years in more depth...and on jacksonianmarch's side, one could point out that signing Type "A" free agents can cost us draft picks. Still, I can't quibble with example1's conclusions here, either.

 

What do we need draft picks for if we're going to sell every potential tom seaver or jake peavy, along with grady sizemore, for whoever happens to be the hottest FA out there for 50times the money? I know there is more to the discussion than that, and that having those players allows you to get the big guys, but seriously, it would be ironic if anyone turned around and argued that getting a FA would cost us .... wait .... wait .... draft picks.

 

Draft picks are apparently just unproven garbage who should be traded at a moment's notice for the first thing with MLB experience. Even if that experience came on the equivalent of a AAAA team someplace out west.

 

I think you should put your impressive analytical skills to work and try to make another version of my argument JayBill. You have a better way with words, or numbers, or something.

 

Again, for me it boils down to:

 

Team A:

Peavy

Ellsbury

Buchholz

 

is better than

 

Team B:

Santana.

[YAZMAN]

Again, for me it boils down to:

 

Team A:

Peavy

Ellsbury

Buchholz

 

is better than

 

Team B:

Santana.

 

+1

[example1]

I am conceding that you guys are built to win multiple championships. Acquiring Santana would cement a few more in the short run and seeing as he is 28' date=' it does some good things for the long run too. Today is another one of those dickpunch days.[/quote']

 

Or, we could be set with our two guys who are in the midst of their prime right now (Matsuzaka and Beckett), and let our other two guys mature so THEY are in their prime when Hughes and Chamberlain are in their prime, thus making the Red Sox viable both now and in the future. Or we could just keep hitting Coco Crisp in the 8 hole for the next 6 years until someone decides they should take the spot from him.

 

s***, the no-brainer here for me is that, while Santana would be nice, the Red Sox have the talent to win now, already. They also have the ability to buy ANY ONE of those pitchers next year. Screw it.

[jacksonianmarch]

example, I guess the point is that there is a window for multiple championships. You can walk right past it and be set up for long term success, but still be close enough to the rest of the league to get knocked off. Or you can open it right up and burn a bit of long term success to make yourselves the FAR AND AWAY favorites for the next 3-4 yrs. Getting Santana would guarantee you guys 2-3 more championships based solely on the young 3 headed monster you could throw out there every 5 days and then to start off a playoff series. Not getting him and keeping status quo only guarantees you success, with a good shot at anoter ring.

[example1]

Mo did it in many postseasons. Paps has done it in one.

 

And how many did he blow?

 

An extension of your argument is that a player is naturally better if they play on a playoff team than if they don't. It's absurd.

 

I bet if you asked 10 MLB hitters (across ages) who they would rather face, many of them would say they would rather face Mariano Rivera and his "cutter away" rather than that insane dancing fool the Red Sox have. They would know very well that success should not be expected against either of them.

[YAZMAN]

Or, we could be set with our two guys who are in the midst of their prime right now (Matsuzaka and Beckett), and let our other two guys mature so THEY are in their prime when Hughes and Chamberlain are in their prime, thus making the Red Sox viable both now and in the future. Or we could just keep hitting Coco Crisp in the 8 hole for the next 6 years until someone decides they should take the spot from him.

 

s***, the no-brainer here for me is that, while Santana would be nice, the Red Sox have the talent to win now, already. They also have the ability to buy ANY ONE of those pitchers next year. Screw it.

 

Which, along with buying a few other "can't miss" superstars, was the NYY formula for failure since 2000.

[example1]

example' date=' I guess the point is that there is a window for multiple championships. You can walk right past it and be set up for long term success, but still be close enough to the rest of the league to get knocked off. Or you can open it right up and burn a bit of long term success to make yourselves the FAR AND AWAY favorites for the next 3-4 yrs. Getting Santana would guarantee you guys 2-3 more championships based solely on the young 3 headed monster you could throw out there every 5 days and then to start off a playoff series. Not getting him and keeping status quo only guarantees you success, with a good shot at anoter ring.[/quote']

 

Jacksonian, I have heard the "window for multiple championships" thing for so long now it makes me sick. I just celebrated a championship, two years after celebrating another. a700 and other reactionaries around here said "we have a window" "we have a window" for the past few years. We let Pedro go and it was "but our window!". Damon leaves and its "but our window is closing"

 

Over and over and over again I brought up the word "retooling", which the FO publically said was their goal in 05 and 06. Over and over and over again people warned me about this window closing. Lo-and-behold, in 07 we win a championship on the backs of young talent, some of it drafted by letting those other guys go. We have David Ortiz until 2011 (if we want him). We have Manny for nearly as long (if we want him). We have a cost-controlled Youkilis, Pedroia and Ellsbury. We have Varitek. JD Drew is signed for years. Papelbon made 400K this year. Buchholz is a stud. Lester is probably better than 3/4 of the Yankees staff right now. So I'm not too worried about the so-called "window"

 

Personally, I think the window will be open as long as John Henry's checkbook and Theo Epstein's brain are open.

 

Furthermore, if you think that the window is open because the yankees are retooling then you have another thing coming. Every single Yankee championship team had a combination of stars and home grown talent. The Yankees will not win again unless they make alot of moves, starting with pitching, but also including bats. WE BEAT THE YANKEES THIS YEAR, and they were not retooling.

 

They had Clemens, A-Rod, Rivera, Jeter, Abreu, Damon, Matsui, all the same stars you've had for the past few years, including a number of near-HOF or actual HOF talent. You didn't win this year, not because you were retooling, but because the Red Sox were simply better. They built a better team and it wasn't luck. They led the entire season basically. They outbid you guys on the best possible SP on the market last year, and I would bet on them to do it again and again. Meanwhile, the Yankees "retooling" starts with a hushed offer of 5 years, 12m a season to Mike Lowell? Is that part of the cheaper, younger, better movement? That's a deal NOBODY here would touch, and we all like Mike Lowell.

 

I'm pretty confident with the Sox chances next year, as I see no reason they shouldn't score more runs with a leadoff hitter in the lineup, Dice-K in his second year and Buchholz who is hands-down a better pitcher than Schilling at this point. Even schilling would acknowledge that Buchholz's stuff is better, and Clay doesn't seem to get nervous.

So in terms of run-differential, the Sox are probably on pace to at least match this season, which gave them the best differential in baseball and the best record in baseball. With Buchholz they are going to be at least as good if not better. The same is true of Santana, but for considerably more money and without the need to throw Ellsbury and Lars Anderson into the deal just to satisfy the pitching-sweet-tooth that some of the trigger-happy members of this board have advocated.

[jacksonianmarch]

If Santana goes to the FA market, there is absolutely ZERO way he dons a uniform other than a yankee one unless he absolutely has no interest in NY. You can bet the yankees would offer 25mil a yr for him. I'd take him over Peavy any day of the week.

[example1]

Which' date=' along with buying a few other "can't miss" superstars, was the NYY formula for failure since 2000.[/quote']

 

********. The NYY formula was always to buy the best bat on the market no matter what the price and to ride it out with old pitching. Who were the "cant' miss superstars" you're talking about? Alfonso Soriano? He's had a pretty good career. Who else? Mike Lowell?

 

At NO point have the Yankees made even ONE move that rivaled the intelligence of signing Matsuzaka to a huge front-loaded (i.e., bidding price heavy) contract. The Red Sox front office simply is not the Yankees front office.

 

I would expect people to realize that this FO has been to the playoffs in 03, 04, 05 and 07; they won the WS twice, and came a run (or a few pitches) away from getting to the Series as favorites in 03.

 

Again, the Yankees mantra is to go after guys like Damon and Lowell. The Red Sox mantra is to let those guys go if they want contracts that are longer than the Sox want to pay. If you don't see that difference then it is going to be a long, long life under Theo's regime for you.

[jacksonianmarch]

That "was" their mantra. Chamberlain, Hughes and Kennedy are proof that there has been a change of philosophy.

[example1]

If Santana goes to the FA market' date=' there is absolutely ZERO way he dons a uniform other than a yankee one unless he absolutely has no interest in NY. You can bet the yankees would offer 25mil a yr for him. I'd take him over Peavy any day of the week.[/quote']

 

You're so arrogant about the Yankees man. Go ahead and take Peavy over him any day. Again, I'll take Peavy + Buchholz + Ellsbury. Who are you going to trade to get Santana?

[example1]

That "was" their mantra. Chamberlain' date=' Hughes and Kennedy are proof that there has been a change of philosophy.[/quote']

 

yeah, until you trade Hughes and Kennedy to get Santana.