Dojji

Hell no. He'll have value as a swingman and injury replacement. Just because we have 5 guys doesn't mean none of them ever get hurt. I'd rather force deserving young pitchers into swing roles until a spot opens, than force prospects into the big leagues because we didn't bother to stock the larder. Big markets just do not give rotation spots to struggling youngsters. Enough Buchholzes. We have the resources to keep a staff of 5 professional starting pitchers. Earn your keep now or have your role reduced, that simple.

Does that mean this team is supposed to not many any improvements so that E-rod gets what he "deserves?" This isn't how big markets work ppl

Farrell needs to win these games because it only gets harder from here. Not surprising that he goes to his top guys whenever he thinks he can get away with it.

I really hope Farrell isn't managing for the meaningless stat that is saves.

Fixed that for you. No no no, no more dabbling around with the Bastard Batallion and no more starting the clock on prospects better served by developing with time and patience. I've had enough of the illusion of depth. Bring in a 5th strong professional starter and I will be quite happy thank you.

Get better and put it where? All of Price Wright, Porcello, and Pomeranz are under contradct through at least 2018. Adding Santana would lock the rotation down with 5 pitchers for the next 2 seasons after this one and relegate the rookie starters to the role they're supposed to be used for -- injury relief. besides, Santana has every ability to pitch up from time to time, he's been as good as a solid 2-3 starter, how much "better" are you going to get for the flipping 5 spot in the rotation?

don't see how adding durability and consistency to the bottom of the rotation is a sideways move. Comparing the overall value of a Buchholz vs a Santana, there is no comparison.

That's an unreasonable expectation in baseball. An ace needs to be able to pull out 1-0 wins from time to time. He has to be able to win with what he's given to work with, especially if he's paid like an ace. And what Price has been given to work with is usually good enough to win with, if you're an ace.

I think his beef is more with fWAR than FanGraphs itself, but of course MVP can speak for himself.

Frankly, if that's the conspiracy then I'm in favor of it, because it was clear that the old core was aging and the young core wasn't ready. The shocker was that the dregs and remnants of the old core, a handful of VERY green prospects and a few patched in pieces strung together a WS win in 2013 somehow.

The one thing you can't accuse Ervin Sanatna of is lack of durability. A normal year for him is somewhere between 175 and 200 innings. In the last 5 years Santana has pitched 228 2/3, 178 in a down year, 211, 196, and 108 in an injury shortened season, and is on pace for over 180 innings this year. The trend is durability, last year is the exception that proves the rules. I've been calling for adding more more guy in the Jeremy Guthrie/Paul Byrd/Ryan Dempster mold. Santana is at the high end of that group of pitchers at this point in his career. he is a very good bet to improve the rotation if we bring him in.

Santana is actually very durable, his inning count per season over his career is not one of a guy who can't go deep into games. For a bad team he's averaging 5 2/3 innings a start this year, that's not bad at all.

Not one more time. How many times have we had to spend other assets to bring in that "replacement level pitcher?" How much raw talent has the luxury of Buchholz cost us? You could make a very good argument that he just cost us the most talented pitching prospect we've had in the system in generations. and this is nowhere near the first time. Get the bum out of here, let him eat into someone else's talent reserves every year to replace the starts he should be making.

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

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.

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

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.

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!

And that's why BC was really fired. The fact of the matter is he was too inexperienced to hold the line against ownership and tell them no when they needed to be told no. The result was 3 rudderless disappointing seasons where it was tough to tell what the team was thinking. The decision to replace BC with a mature no-nonsense veteran was one of the most mature things I think I've ever seen ownership do. The direction of the team is now clear because one person is calling the shots on the roster and fielding ownership expectations without undue dithering. BC was a very smart GM and he knew his baseball, but he was too wet behind the ears to get the job done here, the problem wasn't lack of knowledge it was lack of professional experience and maturity. Boston is a hell of a first posting as GM after all. He'll eventually sign on with some small market that will let him build things the way he wants to and make a great career for himself, gain the maturity he needs and who knows, maybe even be back in Boston when he's ready.

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 seem to recall making that point a few times in the offseason when I think it was MVP started talking about how picking up Clay's option was a "no brainer."

What in particular about Bedard?

I think the job in 2015 was simply to sit pat and let the rookies develop. That mission was accomplished. BC isn't a bad GM, he did a very solid job in drafting and building up our arsenal of prospects, but I think a switch to a more aggressive go-get-your-man guy fit the need of the franchise when DD was brought in.

Agreed, and let's consider another angle. let's say that Pomeranz gets through this season as a Padre, or on a different team, and does live up to the billing. Does anyone honestly think that at that point any team that wanted to trade for him, with those further 2 years of control, could get away with paying nothing but an A ball teenager, however high the ceiling is, for a guy like that? Scouts are saying this year's version of Pomeranz is for real and that it's very possible that the breakout can be sustained. If that is the case, we got him at a discount. The pitcher Pomeranz was projected to be at the draft was every bit as good as Espinosa's projections when we acquired him, if he has had his breakout and reached that potential, then we traded a top 5 prospect for the guy top 5 prospects try to become and cashed on on the lion's share of Espinosa's potential 5+ years early. Trading large unproven potential for a reality nearly as large is always a good trade.

Yeah, attrition could be a big factor in some team overpaying for Hill, but I take DD's word for it that the price at the time was roughly the same for Pomeranz and Hill, and in that case I'd 1000x rather pay for Pomeranz. I don't agree that the eventual price Hill is traded for will be a factor in evaluating this trade. Just because, say, the Blue Jays land Hill for a price that we consider lesser than Espinosa doesn't mean that either Beane or DD valued the same players the same way. Also for a pure rental like Hill, those 3 extra starts you get or don't, are a much bigger part of the overall value discussion.