2016 Trade and Roster Move Speculation thread

[mvp 78]

Sox are in talks with the Twins for Ervin Santana, btw. Wright, Pomeranz, Price, Porcelli, Santana

 

Would be stuck with him through 2018. Blech.

[S5Dewey]

Would be stuck with him through 2018. Blech.

 

Interesting. I heard an unsubstantiated rumor (from a friend) yesterday that the Sox were in talks with the Twins and I asked who they have that we'd want? But the trade rumor involved Buch, which makes more sense now.

[mvp 78]

Interesting. I heard an unsubstantiated rumor (from a friend) yesterday that the Sox were in talks with the Twins and I asked who they have that we'd want? But the trade rumor involved Buch, which makes more sense now.

 

Buchholz straight up for Santana? Maybe they don't see any of their starters being ready until late 2018/early 2019? If that's the case, then I guess you do it since the FA market is pretty dismal this year.

[Jack Flap]

Santana is thoroughly meh, but kind of the anti-Buch: you can pencil him in for 180 innings of average pitching (give or take) and forget about it.

 

Ideally, E-Rod looks good over his next few starts and any additional moves become unnecessary.

[Dojji]

Ervin santana is the guy I wanted DD to get in the first place. He outsmarted me easily by going after Pomeranz who wasn't even on my radar. but the need I identified was experienced and professional starters to grace the bottom of a rotation, and Santana is more than adequate to that.

 

Santana is a league average pitcher who's contributing about 5 2/3 innings a start to the Minnesota Twins right now and has taken the ball 17 of the 17 times he was supposed to. He's also extremely durable with many seasons of 190-200 innings behind him. Durable, stable league average professional starters are exactly what we need right now. That combination of attributes would be DAMN GOOD at the bottom of the rotation. If we can get him without giving up an untouchable, it would be criminal negligence for DD to walk away from that.

 

As for being "stuck" with a highly durable league average guy in the 5 hole until 2018, I have only thee words in response to that: BRING IT ON!

Edited July 19, 2016 by Dojji

[S5Dewey]

Interesting comparison in terms of salary.

 

Santana is guaranteed $13.5M in 2017 and Clay gets $13.5M if we exercise his option.

 

Santana then gets $13.5M in 2018 & $14M in 2019, but there's a $1M buyout in each year depending on IP the previous year.

 

I see Santana as what he is and Buch as someone who may benefit from a change of scenery.

 

I've been a big Buch supporter but I'm done with that gamble. If the Sox can work out something with the Twinkies I can be on board. How about if we give up Buch and a PTBNL, depending on how Buch does in Minnesota?

[S5Dewey]

 

As for being stuck with a league average guy in the 5 hole until 2018, I have only thee words in response to that: BRING IT ON!

 

I've got two more words: Ryan Dempster.

[Dojji]

Interesting comparison in terms of salary.

 

Santana is guaranteed $13.5M in 2017 and Clay gets $13.5M if we exercise his option.

 

Santana then gets $13.5M in 2018 & $14M in 2019, but there's a $1M buyout in each year depending on IP the previous year.

 

I see Santana as what he is and Buch as someone who may benefit from a change of scenery.

 

I've been a big Buch supporter but I'm done with that gamble. If the Sox can work out something with the Twinkies I can be on board. How about if we give up Buch and a PTBNL, depending on how Buch does in Minnesota?

 

Since we're gaining 2 years of control, I think it would cost additional prospects. Looking at Minnesota's needs, which are many, this could be one of those trades where you could actually get a useful guy for a bucket of used parts but I think there has to be at least one guy Minnesota can count on to be some kind of regular contributor in the immediate future. We'll see.

 

Hey, I wonder if we can up the stakes a bit and bring in Kurt Suzuki as well, As much as I like Sandy Leon, counting on him not to turn into a pumpkin at some point is a fool's gamble, and we're trying to win the World Series here. Suzuki's no superstar, but he's a professional catcher you can count on not to blow up on you. We have a legit hole at catcher right now and Suzuki is under contract through the end of this year with an option on next year. It's a potential fit if the Twins are willing to keep the price reasonable.

Edited July 19, 2016 by Dojji

[Dojji]

I've got two more words: Ryan Dempster.

 

Exactly. Adding a stable durable professional to the underbelly of a rotation is never a bad thing as long as the price is fair.

[mvp 78]

I'd rather Hannigan and Leon than Suzuki. Suzuki can hit a little better, but his glove is way worse imo.

[Dojji]

I'd agree if I wasn't very suspicious of Leon's sudden transformation into Johnny Bench. If he can keep this impersonation going we don't have a problem, but I can't see him sustaining this.

[d-money]

Can santana still hit 92 and 93 on the fastball? I notice he has pitched better for the twins.

[Dojji]

Santana has had 4 reasonably productive seasons in a row, counting last year which was cut short by injury, and he had a legit great year with the Royals in 13. I don't know the particulars but I don't think it's unreasonable to expect him to have a little more in the tank at the age of 33

[Kimmi]

who's your alternative at 1B next year guys. Sam Travis is hurt and had mediocre numbers in AAA, he'd have to destroy the ball to break camp with the team first week of April. Shaw is our incumbent at 3B and playing well enough there that there's no point moving him. That leaves Hanley, Pablo and possibly Swihart or Moncada playing 1b for us next year.

 

As much hype as there is surrounding Moncada, I don't think any of the other alternatives are any more likely to be as effective on both sides of the ball as Hanley and certainly not enough so to sacrifice depth for.

 

I don't really get the desire to trade Hanley, especially when the team would be selling low on him. Hanley could possibly be a good DH next year if a better option for 1B comes along. It's a small sample, but he has good numbers when he DHs.

[Kimmi]

I could be on board with picking up Santana.

[mvp 78]

I'd agree if I wasn't very suspicious of Leon's sudden transformation into Johnny Bench. If he can keep this impersonation going we don't have a problem, but I can't see him sustaining this.

 

If he hits .240, he's better than Leon. He's a 27 year old catcher coming into his own. Is it that big of a surprise that he could be a moderate starter? Suzuki is 5 years older and has way more mileage on him.

[mvp 78]

Can santana still hit 92 and 93 on the fastball? I notice he has pitched better for the twins.

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=3200&position=P#pitchtype

 

It's averaging 92.5, so it's not a concern. He seems to be the same pitcher he's always been.

[mvp 78]

He's not really a fastball pitcher anyway. He throws a good mix with the majority of his pitches being offspeed this year.

[d-money]

He's not really a fastball pitcher anyway. He throws a good mix with the majority of his pitches being offspeed this year.

 

Well he throws the slider pitch alot and has to have that speed difference with his fastball. I wouldn't mind this move. Depends on what the twins want.

[mvp 78]

The only problem is that his changeup and slider are basically the same speed.

[moonslav59]

Buchholz straight up for Santana? Maybe they don't see any of their starters being ready until late 2018/early 2019? If that's the case, then I guess you do it since the FA market is pretty dismal this year.

 

Santana-- 16-18:$13.5M annually. 19:$14M club option

 

2014-2016:

 

WHIP 1.30 (66th out of 107 MLB startersw ith 350+ IP since 2014)

 

ERA- 103 (70th out of 107)

 

Santana 65 GS 402 IP 3.96 xFIP

Buchholz 59 GS 355 IP 4.10 xFIP

 

Am I missing something?

 

Right now, I have Buch as our 7th SP'er. Santana is barely an upgrade over Buch, but he's getting $13M for 2 more years!

 

 

 

[Hugh2]

 

 

 

Am I missing something?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Santana's IP the last 5 years: 228 2/3 178 211 196 108

Buchholz IP the last 5 years: 82 2/3 189.1 108 170 113

 

Santana is on pace for about 180 IP this year.

 

Consistency goes a long long way, There's been less variation in his numbers as well where Clay has had a couple really good runs and then been absolutely awful at times. If healthy, Santana is a much much better option in the back of the rotation for a reasonable cost.

[mvp 78]

Interesting starting point as the data is skewed by Santana missing half of 2015 with an injury. Buchholz has pitched 150 innings or more 3 times. Santana has pitched 150 innings or more 8 times and is well on his way to make it 9 this year.

[mvp 78]

Santana's IP the last 5 years: 228 2/3 178 211 196 108

Buchholz IP the last 5 years: 82 2/3 189.1 108 170 113

 

Santana is on pace for about 180 IP this year.

 

Consistency goes a long long way, There's been less variation in his numbers as well where Clay has had a couple really good runs and then been absolutely awful at times. If healthy, Santana is a much much better option in the back of the rotation for a reasonable cost.

 

Yeah, Santana is far and away a better pitcher than Buchholz.

[Hugh2]

Yeah, Santana is far and away a better pitcher than Buchholz.

 

agree, I'd do this trade all day. I have to believe something else is going the twins way, I would say a lower level prospect outside the top ten but after the past year with DD I don't feel safe making those predictions anymore. Still, I don't think it would take much more if the Twins are looking for salary relief.

[moonslav59]

Santana's IP the last 5 years: 228 2/3 178 211 196 108

Buchholz IP the last 5 years: 82 2/3 189.1 108 170 113

 

Santana is on pace for about 180 IP this year.

 

Consistency goes a long long way, There's been less variation in his numbers as well where Clay has had a couple really good runs and then been absolutely awful at times. If healthy, Santana is a much much better option in the back of the rotation for a reasonable cost.

 

Well, my 3 year sample size was not cherry-picked. It included two of Buch's worst seasons ever. It is more recent than the chosen 5 year sample, so maybe more telling.

 

How about looking at 4 year, 6 year and 7 year sample sizes? The differences are not as great.

 

Here's the 7 year (2010-2016):

 

Santana 193 GS 1243 IP (27 GS/yr & 177 IP/yr) 4.05 xFIP 100 ER- 1.26 WHIP

Buchholz 146 GS 909 IP (21 GS/yr & 130 IP/yr) 4.09 xFIP 91 ERA- 1.28 WHIP

 

How about 4 years?

 

Santana 95 ERA- 1.25 WHIP (97 GS/613 IP = 24 GS/153 IP)

Buccholz 99 ERA- 1.28 WHIP (75 GS/463 IP = 19 GS/116 IP)

 

The differences are not so stark as choosing the 5 year sample size that happens to include 3 of Buch's worst years.

 

I wasn't cherry-picking the 3 year sample size, as that is what I normally use.

 

 

I wasn't trying to claim Buch is better than Santana, but how much better does Santana have to be to be better than our #7 or #10 SP'er? Plus, the main issue to me is the $13M x 2 owed after this season.

[moonslav59]

agree, I'd do this trade all day. I have to believe something else is going the twins way, I would say a lower level prospect outside the top ten but after the past year with DD I don't feel safe making those predictions anymore. Still, I don't think it would take much more if the Twins are looking for salary relief.

 

So, you'd agree to sign Santana this winter to $26M/2?

 

I'm not saying it's a horrible signing, but it's not an easy "yes" to me.

 

It reminds me of the Dempster signing. Some liked it and still defend it. I was against it.

[User Name]

The 47 IP/year difference doesn't tell you anything? That' s more than 7 starts per at 6 IP/start.

[moonslav59]

The 47 IP/year difference doesn't tell you anything? That' s more than 7 starts per at 6 IP/start.

 

That is a big difference, but so is a 91 to 100 ERA- differential.

 

Again, I'm not saying Buch has been better than Santana over 3, 4, 5, 6 or 7 years. He's certainly way worse this year.

 

I chose the comp, because they both are being paid $13M, and they both are slotted or would be slotted as our 5th or lower SP'er, and I see so much vitriol against Buch, that I don't see a big difference in their two histories. The IP differential is nearly cancelled out by the ERA- disparity.

 

Yess, I think Santana is an upgrade over Buch, but Buch is our 8th or 9th SP'er right now, so Santana would have to be way better (or better than ERod and others) to be worth taking on $26M/2 after this year.

Edited July 19, 2016 by moonslav59

[Hugh2]

I do agree that a 3 year recent sample size can be more telling than a 6 year. One caveat to the "larger the sample the better" rule is the longer you go out the more likely you are including good stats to a guy who is declining, or stats when he started out and struggled while he's in his prime.

 

However, as with everything, context is needed. That one year Santana was hurt weighs down a 3 year sample size more than a 6 year and besides that one half season missed Santana has a remarkedly better track record than Clay.

 

If Santana could be had for Clay, that's as about as easy a yes as you can get. I suspect it would take a bit more but Santana is an easy upgrade over Clay.