Johan Santana

[jacksonianmarch]

Haren is going to cost a lot more than Santana. He is under contract for 3 more seasons, is cheap, and is 2 yrs younger.

[cam780]

Okay, Mr. just watch a baseball game to see who's better:

 

What did you notice from your careful observation of Ellsbury's poor streaks last year? What percentage of strikes was Santana throwing when he got beat last year? Did it 'look' like he was getting shelled, or did he just give up bloop hits.

 

The fact is, unless you study tape and watch EVERY SINGLE INNING of a pitcher pitching you are going to be off base with your 'just watch him' philosophy. Chances are you, like most of us here, watched MAYBE 4 Santana starts last year, and MAYBE 4 the year prior. So you may have seen 8 Santana starts, where you watched every single pitch and took really careful note... you know, like professional scouts do.

 

Or, you might be like me and have only watched, MAYBE 1 or 2 starts of his from start to finish the past few years.

 

I think it's funny how much 'observation' some people claim to be capable of. Personally, I don't have the time to watch a majority of Red Sox games AND to catch every other significant player out there. Unlike you, I apparently must rely on the statistics.

 

Fortunately, statisticians understand that this is a problem and have developed reliable statistics to measure production over a large span of time. If you don't think it's valid then more power to you, but you should be thankful that the Red Sox do because your view--based on an insufficient scouting report--would be wholly inadequate.

 

 

 

Yes, but if it isn't backed up by a statistical record, I have to wonder whether that "swagger" or even that "ace" actually exist.

 

 

 

1. Haren isn't Santana. True. Neither are most pitchers. What does Haren cost again?

 

2. Whether or not Haren is

 

It is fine to ridicule someone who uses Win Shares as a metric, but to then say that using your 'eyes' is just as good or better is absurd. Try again.

 

I agree with you on this one. To me its Santana or keep your prospects. The 6th, 7th or 8th best pitcher in the league doesn't cement your rotation like the best pitcher does and I'd argue that Buchholz and Lester have a better chance at being in that crowd than being the best in the game.

 

The one point I'd mention is that the $$ would be worth it because Beckett himself is worth twice what he makes.

[cam780]

Haren is going to cost a lot more than Santana. He is under contract for 3 more seasons' date=' is cheap, and is 2 yrs younger.[/quote']

 

I wouldn't say alot more. I'd say it would have to be the same deal. The contract is one thing but the difference in money is about equal to the difference in talent. The Haren sweepstakes though will be alot more wide open. If the Angels get Miggy, I think the Dodgers could swing the deal for Haren without blinking an eye. If you think about it, Tampa could swing a deal for him just as well.

[jacksonianmarch]

BTW, I didnt know it was the Times that reported that the Twins like Ellsbury more than Hughes. The Times, ie the paper that has an owners share in the Red Sox. The NY paper with the Boston slant. Consider the source on this one.

[BSN07]

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20071203&content_id=2316004&vkey=hotstove2007&fext=.jsp

 

Sounds like Minny is in no hurry and might call NY bluff for there deadline.

 

Hanky is really helping his own cause... This guy has his foot in his mouth on a consistant basis... I find him amusing...

 

So what happens if this deal goes past the dealine undone? If Santana is serious about only Yanks and Sox then the Sox would be the only ones left. Unless NY re-negs on there word again. Which if they do, there FO will be a laughing stock. There word will be nothing to any other organizations.

 

If that happens that gives Theo a big advantage negotiation wise. Minny will have to take the 4 player deal or take 2 picks when Santana walks.

[cam780]

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20071203&content_id=2316004&vkey=hotstove2007&fext=.jsp

 

Sounds like Minny is in no hurry and might call NY bluff for there deadline.

 

Hanky is really helping his own cause... This guy has his foot in his mouth on a consistant basis... I find him amusing...

 

So what happens if this deal goes past the dealine undone? If Santana is serious about only Yanks and Sox then the Sox would be the only ones left. Unless NY re-negs on there word again. Which if they do, there FO will be a laughing stock. There word will be nothing to any other organizations.

 

If that happens that gives Theo a big advantage negotiation wise. Minny will have to take the 4 player deal or take 2 picks when Santana walks.

 

NY's front office is already a laughing stock from A-Rod but they're in a definate pissing match which isn't good since the other team has the guy you want. I'm thinking he's pretty confident that the Twins feel that they have the best offer which who knows they might but I tend to believe that Sox genuinely want Santana because they know what having him will do for this rotation and that being said even if today comes and goes and Santana is still on the Twins, then I think it will be the same offer required because the Twins know that this is as much about keeping this guy away from the Yanks as it is bettering their own staff and its not like the Twins can't afford him this year there are worse alternatives and over the course of the next year they may just be able to talk Santana into staying (long shot admittedly) especially if they turn around and compete.

 

I am positive that I will post another 'whisper' soon.

Almost missed this - kinda sad that the #1 thread belongs to Mark Bellhorn though.

[jacksonianmarch]

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20071203&content_id=2316004&vkey=hotstove2007&fext=.jsp

 

Sounds like Minny is in no hurry and might call NY bluff for there deadline.

 

Hanky is really helping his own cause... This guy has his foot in his mouth on a consistant basis... I find him amusing...

 

So what happens if this deal goes past the dealine undone? If Santana is serious about only Yanks and Sox then the Sox would be the only ones left. Unless NY re-negs on there word again. Which if they do, there FO will be a laughing stock. There word will be nothing to any other organizations.

 

If that happens that gives Theo a big advantage negotiation wise. Minny will have to take the 4 player deal or take 2 picks when Santana walks.

 

If I were Hank, I'd stick to my word. With Pettitte back, the needs falls more on the Twins side in terms of a need to deal him than it is on our side in a need to have him fashion. Sure, it would be awesome to have him anchor our staff, but with the top 2 spots secure, we are a lot better off than Wang and a bunch of kids then moose.

[Jayhawk Bill]

At work, shouldn't be writing, but can't resist.

 

I don't know a better overall metric to use other than WS. I look around and have a hard time finding one. Runs Created is great for offense, WARP, VORP are other options. I chose WS.

 

I know, from private messages between you and I, that you disagree with the fielding aspect of it, which is fine with me. I think it is still a useful way of looking at players--especially hitters and pitchers--and is a good way, as far as I can tell, of comparing one player at one position with one player at another position.

 

Given that we are comparing a pitcher with a 'hasn't really played yet' CFer (for whom OF WS are hard to find), I did the best I could.

 

Second, if I'm reading your post right, you think it is too high for me to assume that Santana will produce 150% of what he already has. FINE WITH ME!!!

 

If you couldn't tell, I made that estimation, placing him in the pantheon of great career pitchers like Smoltz, Glavine, Clemens and Maddux, to get people to stop thinking I was biased against Santana in favor of Ellsbury. I'm trying to be generous, because I think the argument for Ellsbury's ability to match Santana's career WS from here on out is a pretty strong one. If you think that is too high then you're in luck, so do I.

 

Even with those lofty 'expectations" I thought I showed pretty solidly why that further amount of Win Shares, by an OF, is not at all unattainable. Pitchers who produce like Santana has for the past 5 years are very valuable, but as soon as they start slipping into the middle group of pitchers they become players who only play every 5th day and their WS totals dip considerably.

 

If you have the time (and energy) to do it, I would love to see a NON-WS based evaluation of the projected future.

 

FWIW, I'm in the middle of reading Bill James' "Win Shares" right now, and actually--aside from the fielding, which we can talk about privately--I find it a brilliant work.

 

 

Aside:

 

I don't know if you're at all familiar with Ludwig Wittgenstein's "Tractatus Philosophica" but it is a point by point, logical break down of analytical thought, using logic, with the goal toward putting an end to philosophy. It is WAY over my head as an analytical philosophical work, but it supposedly is quite profound (when Bertrand Russell asked questions about it at Wittgenstein's doctoral defense of the work, he was told, essentially, "Don't worry Bertrand, you just won't get it"). Anyway, I have a similar feeling reading this book by James. I am able to follow it pretty well, but I find the scope and approach of the book to be very solid. I also LOVE the idea of having a simple number to quantify and summarize all of the OTHER numbers that statisticans keep.

 

There are undoubtedly criticisms of the system at large, but the majority or lists produced using it, and the methods for composing it, are really, really solid in my opinion (much more solid than claims like "he will never match the production of so and so). Getting a solid number gives you a good barometer to compare players by. Again, my guess is that if Win Shares is Bill James' baby, and if James is one of the Sox consultants on things like this, then they are using some modified WS method for this question.

 

Furthermore, the WS totals that I am using are from THT, and have been adapted from James's to a revised model.

 

Forgive me for OVER hyping what Santana is capable of, if only to prove a point. I get the sense that a lot of people around here expect him to keep producing at the same rate, and they don't realize that anything below that rate moves him into the group of other regulars who do NOT justify 20m a year.

 

Again, thanks for filling me in. I'm going to stick with WS but your observations are dualy noted. I hope you now recognize that when I say "do you think that would be fair?" I'm trying to get over the anti-Santana bias that people ascribe to me. My valuation of the rest of his career is, truly, much closer to yours.

 

cheers.

 

Thanks for the response.

 

1) Rather than Win Shares, I'd use WARP; better than either, I'd use VORP along with a second-generation or third-generation fielding metric, but those fielding metrics range into the proprietary method world of knowledge. I guarantee you that Boston doesn't use Win Shares to evaluate trades; there was a great piece in BP in early August 2005 that suggested that they possibly used a sophisticated accounting model coupled with a model not dissimilar to WARP and PECOTA. I don't expect that they use either WARP or PECOTA in their internal modeling, but I bet that they use a system that's very similar in its detail. Win Shares is grossly inaccurate regarding defense, and I doubt that they use it.

 

2) Yup, you're overestimating Johan Santana. Glad that I made you happy.

[example1]

Thanks for the response.

 

1) Rather than Win Shares, I'd use WARP; better than either, I'd use VORP along with a second-generation or third-generation fielding metric, but those fielding metrics range into the proprietary method world of knowledge. I guarantee you that Boston doesn't use Win Shares to evaluate trades; there was a great piece in BP in early August 2005 that suggested that they possibly used a sophisticated accounting model coupled with a model not dissimilar to WARP and PECOTA. I don't expect that they use either WARP or PECOTA in their internal modeling, but I bet that they use a system that's very similar in its detail. Win Shares is grossly inaccurate regarding defense, and I doubt that they use it.

 

2) Yup, you're overestimating Johan Santana. Glad that I made you happy.

 

I guess I have found a fair amount of value in Win Shares, though I don't know enough about all the other ones to know where they differ. WS uses a form of Replacement Player, but neutralizing the scoring throughout the league, determining marginal runs score by each team, and then divying those runs up (offensively, at least) according to the runs created formula. Whether it is perfect or not it is a pretty system, in that it takes numbers from the top end (Runs scored by a team, Runs scored throughout the league) and combines them with individual production (RC) to determine what percentage of those runs belong to each hitter. The system is considerably more complex than I describe it--as I'm sure you know--and seems a lot more complex than a blanket dismissal would warrant.

 

Then again, I do respect your opinion and will agree to sort-of-disagree. I don't think it is valid to dismiss any particular metric overall if I feel it makes good progress in certain areas, but rather it would be better to look at all of them and pull out information from there. Lord knows its better than 20 years ago, when AVG, HR ,and RBI would have been the litmus test. :dunno:

 

 

Have you compared VORP + defensive totals with Win Share totals? In other words, does the list of players with highest VORP in 2007 correspond with players with highest Win Shares? I'm not trying to change your mind, but AM trying to eek out some utility for Win Shares, since I'm only now trying to wrap my head around them and feel that the system itself--aside from the various value permutations applied to fielding etc.,--is logically sound and quite ingenius. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I haven't been convinced just yet.

[Jayhawk Bill]

I guess I have found a fair amount of value in Win Shares, though I don't know enough about all the other ones to know where they differ. WS uses a form of Replacement Player, but neutralizing the scoring throughout the league, determining marginal runs score by each team, and then divying those runs up (offensively, at least) according to the runs created formula. Whether it is perfect or not it is a pretty system, in that it takes numbers from the top end (Runs scored by a team, Runs scored throughout the league) and combines them with individual production (RC) to determine what percentage of those runs belong to each hitter. The system is considerably more complex than I describe it--as I'm sure you know--and seems a lot more complex than a blanket dismissal would warrant.

 

Then again, I do respect your opinion and will agree to sort-of-disagree. I don't think it is valid to dismiss any particular metric overall if I feel it makes good progress in certain areas, but rather it would be better to look at all of them and pull out information from there. Lord knows its better than 20 years ago, when AVG, HR ,and RBI would have been the litmus test. :dunno:

 

 

Have you compared VORP + defensive totals with Win Share totals? In other words, does the list of players with highest VORP in 2007 correspond with players with highest Win Shares? I'm not trying to change your mind, but AM trying to eek out some utility for Win Shares, since I'm only now trying to wrap my head around them and feel that the system itself--aside from the various value permutations applied to fielding etc.,--is logically sound and quite ingenius. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I haven't been convinced just yet.

 

I haven't run correlations between Win Shares and VORP + FRAA or WARP or VORP + PMR or UZR or some other run-based second or third generation defensive stat. The biggest difference would be defense; the correlations wouldn't be terrible, but Win Shares grossly overvalues good hitters who can't field and undervalues good fielders.

 

As an aside, did you know that Coco Crisp's excellence in CF played a role in enhancing Manny Ramirez's Win Shares total? Yes, Bill James used overall DER to evaluate all outfielders.

 

[/tangent]

[a700hitter]

Less than 2 hours before Hank's empty bluff of a deadline expires. He is really making an ass of himself this offseason.

[example1]

I haven't run correlations between Win Shares and VORP +

FRAA or WARP or VORP + PMR or UZR or some other run-based second or third generation defensive stat. The biggest difference would be defense; the correlations wouldn't be terrible, but Win Shares grossly overvalues good hitters who can't field and undervalues good fielders.

 

I don't have much to say here, other than that it would be interesting to see:

 

VORP for pitchers in 2007:

 

1. Peavy

2. Webb

3. Sabbathia

4. Carmona

5. Penny

6. Lackey

7. Oswalt

8. Hudson

9. Beckett

10. Santana

11. Smoltz

12. Haren

13. Bedard

---------

WS for pitchers:

 

1. Sabathia

2. Peavy

3. Webb

4. Carmona

5. Lackey

6. Penny

7. Haren

8. Bedard

9. Beckett

10. Vazquez

11. Hudson

12. Santana

13. Escobar

 

-------------

 

2007 VORP for hitters

1. A-Rod

2. Hanley

3. Magglio

4. Ortiz

5. Wright

6. Chipper

7. Holliday

8. Posada

9. Pujols

10. Cabrera

11. Fielder

12. Utley

13. Pena

14. Granderson

15. Rollins

16. Suzuki

17. Vladi

18. Ryan Braun

19. Barry Bonds

20. Victor Martinez

21. Grady Sizemore

 

Win Shares for hitters:

 

1. A-Rod

2. Ordonez

3. Wright

4. Ichiro

5. Pujols

6. Sizemore

7. Vlad

8. VMart

9. Pena

10. M. Cabrera

11. Holliday

12. Ortiz

13. Hanley

14. Utley

15. Rollins

16. Fielder

17. Gonzalez

18. Beltran

19. Granderson

20. Chipper

21. Byrnes

 

Not sure what to make of it. Overall, I think the lists are similar, but WS seems to give guys more credit for fielding. Again, it's not perfect, but Pujols is higher with WS than with VORP, as is Victor Martinez, Ortiz is lower. It appears to me that the players who get the highest fielding WS are on the defensive end of the defensive spectrum (C, SS, in particular take up 16 of the top 20).

 

I don't particularly like the fielding Win Shares system either, but when it is one part of a significantly enormous system for evaluating players, I think that's okay. Notice, JHB, I'm not saying it is a perfect system , but I am saying that I still think it is a good overall system, compared to, say, guessing, or even OPS.

 

I'd be interested to know what caused the discrepancy you saw between Bonds and Pujols. I can tell you that the first one is simply the positions that they play. Catchers get the highest WS and 1B closer to the lowest. I'm not sure why that is. Perhaps the majority of plays at 1B are ones that the average player can make, (and tends to make on most teams). :dunno:

 

As an aside, did you know that Coco Crisp's excellence in CF played a role in enhancing Manny Ramirez's Win Shares total? Yes, Bill James used overall DER to evaluate all outfielders.

 

[/tangent]

 

According to FRAA, the entire team's defensive prowess is used to dole out FRs, isn't it? So, just like Win Shares, the totals are divided among the players based on overall ability to prevent runs.

 

I'll take your answers off the air.

[KeepTheFaith1229]

You do realize Turner Field is an easier park to hit HR in right?

 

Not to left field...

[jacksonianmarch]

sounds like the Yankee talks are dead.

 

They want Hughes, Kennedy, and Melky? That is way too much.

[Jayhawk Bill]

I don't have much to say here, other than that it would be interesting to see:

 

VORP for pitchers in 2007:

 

1. Peavy

2. Webb

3. Sabbathia

4. Carmona

5. Penny

6. Lackey

7. Oswalt

8. Hudson

9. Beckett

10. Santana

11. Smoltz

12. Haren

13. Bedard

---------

WS for pitchers:

 

1. Sabathia

2. Peavy

3. Webb

4. Carmona

5. Lackey

6. Penny

7. Haren

8. Bedard

9. Beckett

10. Vazquez

11. Hudson

12. Santana

13. Escobar

 

-------------

 

2007 VORP for hitters

1. A-Rod

2. Hanley

3. Magglio

4. Ortiz

5. Wright

6. Chipper

7. Holliday

8. Posada

9. Pujols

10. Cabrera

11. Fielder

12. Utley

13. Pena

14. Granderson

15. Rollins

16. Suzuki

17. Vladi

18. Ryan Braun

19. Barry Bonds

20. Victor Martinez

21. Grady Sizemore

 

Win Shares for hitters:

 

1. A-Rod

2. Ordonez

3. Wright

4. Ichiro

5. Pujols

6. Sizemore

7. Vlad

8. VMart

9. Pena

10. M. Cabrera

11. Holliday

12. Ortiz

13. Hanley

14. Utley

15. Rollins

16. Fielder

17. Gonzalez

18. Beltran

19. Granderson

20. Chipper

21. Byrnes

 

Not sure what to make of it. Overall, I think the lists are similar, but WS seems to give guys more credit for fielding. Again, it's not perfect, but Pujols is higher with WS than with VORP, as is Victor Martinez, Ortiz is lower. It appears to me that the players who get the highest fielding WS are on the defensive end of the defensive spectrum (C, SS, in particular take up 16 of the top 20).

 

I don't particularly like the fielding Win Shares system either, but when it is one part of a significantly enormous system for evaluating players, I think that's okay. Notice, JHB, I'm not saying it is a perfect system , but I am saying that I still think it is a good overall system, compared to, say, guessing, or even OPS.

 

I'd be interested to know what caused the discrepancy you saw between Bonds and Pujols. I can tell you that the first one is simply the positions that they play. Catchers get the highest WS and 1B closer to the lowest. I'm not sure why that is. Perhaps the majority of plays at 1B are ones that the average player can make, (and tends to make on most teams). :dunno:

 

According to FRAA, the entire team's defensive prowess is used to dole out FRs, isn't it? So, just like Win Shares, the totals are divided among the players based on overall ability to prevent runs.

 

I'll take your answers off the air.

 

You've got a PM. Three brief points:

 

1) Listing players by VORP isn't even close to using a fielding stat to refine value;

 

2) Win Shares' fielding adjustment is predominantly position-based, as you gathered, so of course WS correlates well with VORP; and

 

3) FRAA assesses team fielding runs and divides them on merit, but it's got far more granularity on how to apportion those runs than Win Shares. There are other systems, mostly ZR-based in some way, that are probably better than FRAA, although there are aspects of FRAA that I appreciate.

[example1]

You've got a PM. Three brief points:

 

1) Listing players by VORP isn't even close to using a fielding stat to refine value;

 

2) Win Shares' fielding adjustment is predominantly position-based, as you gathered, so of course WS correlates well with VORP; and

 

3) FRAA assesses team fielding runs and divides them on merit, but it's got far more granularity on how to apportion those runs than Win Shares. There are other systems, mostly ZR-based in some way, that are probably better than FRAA, although there are aspects of FRAA that I appreciate.

 

Will respond to the PM so as not to clog this thread (any more than I have already ). What I can gather by your explanation is that it is similar in approach, but more thorough in terms of the variables that can impact the system, and particularly the weights of those variables.

 

As with anything, systems clearly build upon systems, necessitated only by flaws in the previous attempts.

[a700hitter]

Hank's deadline has come and passed. Is there any word that they are meeting at this hour?

[Taliesin]

It's clear he didn't want to be a Yankee. He doesn't understand the privilege of being a Yankee on a team where the owners are willing to pay $200 million to put a winning product on the field." Steinbrenner is the new voice of Yankees' ownership, taking over public relations now that his father, George Steinbrenner, has stepped away from the spotlight (drooling on his pillow)

 

"We're not going to back down," Steinbrenner said. "It's goodbye." Thinking of Melky the future Hall of Famer like sugarplums dancing in his dreams.

 

He reminds me of an old boyfriend I once had. Who didn't BTW give me 314 million dollars to stay...the bastard. But sang at my window nonetheless. It's like a Gilbert and Sullivan song. Henry the Eighth I am I am. What a joke of a franchise they have become. Loving it.

[yankeessuck013]

[Beckett95]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/baseball/mlb/12/04/santana.update/

 

NASHVILLE, Tenn. -- With the Yankees and Twins making limited progress as the Yanks' self-imposed midnight deadline came and went, the Twins have rekindled talks with the Red Sox and are asking Boston to present a deal including top young lefthander Jon Lester.

 

People involved in the talks said they believe the situation is coming to a head and that Minnesota will make its call, one way or the other, in fairly short order. The Yankees have been seen as the favorite, but Boston may have renewed hope based upon the midnight phone call.

 

The Twins and Yankees reached what one person termed an "impasse'' at just before midnight Nashville time. The Twins were asking that the Yankees include either pitcher Ian Kennedy or a tandem of pitching prospect Alan Horne and outfield prospect Austin Jackson in their package with pitcher Phil Hughes and outfielder Melky Cabrera.

 

The Red Sox had made offers previously that included Lester or outfielder Jacoby Ellsbury, but not both players. The Red Sox have also been willing to include some other top prospects, such as pitchers Justin Masterson or Michael Bowden and shortstop Jed Lowrie.

 

The Yankees told the Twins earlier that they did not want to include Horne or Jackson, and they certainly didn't want to include both. Two GMs from other teams said they believe Horne is "a No. 5 starter,'' but one scout said Jackson has tremendous potential.

 

The deadline set by Yankees owner Hank Steinbrenner had passed whether he meant New York time, or even Nashville or Minneapolis time. Regardless, the Twins reportedly felt more amused than threatened by the deadline. The Yankees were willing to continue to talk, and if a deal were close Tuesday morning, it's likely they would have kept talking. However, the Twins are now talking to the Red Sox, as well.

[yankeessuck013]

Does that mean Ellsbury + Lester or just Lester. I assume the former.

[TheKilo]

Does that mean Ellsbury + Lester or just Lester. I assume the former.

 

The Twins want:

 

From the Yankees:

 

Hughes/Kennedy/Cabrera OR Hughes/Cabrera/Horne/Jackson

 

From the Red Sox:

 

Ellsbury/Lester/Lowrie

[example1]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/baseball/mlb/12/04/santana.update/

 

I think Lester + Bowden + Crisp would be a better package for the Twins that Hughes + Cabrera, as it would mitigate the risk with a very nice prospect and an MLB ready lefty with good stuff. Bowden has a pretty nice ceiling, and is quite young.

 

I'm hopeful that the Sox blow this out of the water with lower-level talent like masterson and bowden.

 

EDIT: At this point the Red Sox must be being easier to work with than the Yankees. I mean, Theo is not calling out the Twins for not accepting their very nice package.

[arbitrary]

From all accounts it doesn't seem like the sox are willing to give up Ellsbury & Lester. It says the twins asked for a new package that included Lester. So I would take that to mean no Ellsbury then.

[yankeessuck013]

UPDATE, 12-4-07 at 1:25am: Looks like things with the Red Sox are moving along - the Red Sox have given the Twins Lester's medical records to review.

 

UPDATE, 12-4-07 at 1:15am: Unconfirmed report from the Boston Globe says the Red Sox were looking at Santana's medical records, which could imply an agreement. Or maybe they just wanted to check out his medical records

[mosox]

It's looking like a strange night. I'm going to bed, I just hope Ellsbury is still a Red Sox when I wake up in the morning.

[yankeessuck013]

Roto:

 

The Boston Globe reports that the Red Sox have traded medical information with the Twins on Jon Lester in a possible prelude to a Johan Santana deal.

 

It sounds as though something is brewing. If the Red Sox are giving up both Jacoby Ellsbury and Lester, it might mean the Twins are sending back a sweetener. Of course, it's possible Ellsbury isn't in the deal, but we really don't see how the Twins could do a deal without him.

 

With the Yankee conversations at an impasse, the Twins and Red Sox resumed talking about a Johan Santana deal late Monday night, the Boston Globe reports.

 

Or early Tuesday morning, if you prefer. SI.com's Jon Heyman indicated the Yankees and Twins could be done for the night, with the Twins going back to Boston to try to get Jon Lester into the current package being offered. The Globe has received unconfirmed reports that the Red Sox were looking at Santana's medicals, something that could be seen as a prelude to a deal. Time to put on a fresh pot of coffee.

[CrespoBlows]

If Ellsbury, Lester, and Lowrie are really it, pull the trigger please.

[yankeessuck013]

With talks between the Yankees and Twins losing steam, the Red Sox have emerged as the favorite to land left-hander Johan Santana.

 

ESPN.com's Buster Olney reports that the teams continued to talk from late Monday into early Tuesday morning, with the Twins even asking to see medical reports on Red Sox left-hander Jon Lester.

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3140645

 

The Red Sox roared back into the Johan Santana sweepstakes Monday night after the Yankees refused to add right-hander Ian Kennedy to their proposed trade.

 

"They are in it now," a major-league source said of the Sox.

 

The Sox remain unwilling to include outfielder Jacoby Ellsbury in the same deal as left-hander Jon Lester, but the Twins might opt for their offer if the Yankees decline to include a third quality prospect with righty Phil Hughes and outfielder Melky Cabrera.

 

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/7524642

[riverside sluggers]

I just woke up, Ive been passed out since 730. Man I missed a closer than expected Pats-Ravens game. Pats defense is looking more vulnerable, cmon Kyle f***ing Boler lol

 

Anyways, it looks like I missed some hell of an update with Santana. If theyre trading medical reports on Lester, Santana is going to Boston unless New York submits to Hughes/Kennedy/Cabrera

 

Yankees got to look at that rotation

Santana

Wang

Pettitte

Chamberlain

Igawa/Karstens/DeSalvo

 

Not bad at all really