Because you haven't heard enough...
It's true. You haven't heard enough about Johan Santana and that he might be traded by the Minnesota Twins. It’s probably been at least 30 seconds since the last headline about the situation. Frankly, that’s just too long, so I’m going to add to the fray.
The big problem now is that with the relatively recent decision by some small-market teams to use their farm systems to create winning teams, young prospects have been valued all through professional baseball. Even the large-market teams that can afford the superstars are realizing the value of their prospects. This is making the Santana trade very difficult, because his value is hard to judge. How many prospects is a superstar worth? It's not an equal comparison. You might as well ask how many oranges is an electric pencil sharpener worth.
I’ve heard this argument from fans of teams to whom Santana may be traded: "Wait until Santana hits free agency next year! Then we can get him without giving up any prospects!" I think those fans are slightly deluded. For sake of argument, let's pretend that it's the Kansas City Royals going up against the Florida Marlins and Tampa Bay "Devil" Rays. Let's say the Twins worked out a deal to get four of the Royals prospects/rookies for Santana. Now it's up to the Royals to give Santana a contract he likes (say six years for $140 million), he'll accept the trade (what with the no-trade clause), and the deal is done.
Let's say they wait until November, when Santana becomes a free agent. Now the Royals offer Santana the contract the would've offered him now. But then the Marlins come by and say, "We'll give you six years for $150 million." The Rays pipe up and offer seven years for $160 million." The Royals now have to decide whether it's the years or the money that are interesting Santana. Will six years for $170 do it, or seven years for $170? What is it he wants?” In the end, they could end up paying more for Santana next year than they would've paid those prospects for the years of his contract. (Monetarily, anyway.) And with a strong starting pitcher, they might have a World Series ring or two--while he wouldn’t be solely responsible for it, he could be the final push to get it.
What factors are involved in the decision-making of prospects versus a veteran? First, prospects/rookies aren't that expensive (if Santana were traded, it's likely the entire Twins rotation could cost the Twins approximately $2 million, at $400,000 each for Baker, Bonser, Slowey, Perkins, and Blackburn (or whoever is picked up in the trade)). The earliest they can become expensive is when they reach arbitration, which is after three years (or certain cases, two years). The earliest they can file for free agency is after six years. So years 3-6 (or 4-6), can be more expensive, but since they're not in the midst of a bidding war, the prices are still often relatively cheap. Thus, for the six years of Santana's proposed contract, the prospects and rookies would be relatively cheap--and if the prospects are young enough who don’t make the majors immediately, they could well be cheap after Santana's contract is over. Finally, there are no guarantees with prospects. A trade could be 5-for-1, and if all 5 fizzle, it could be a bust trade for the team getting more players. That's why superstars generally command multiple prospects: usually one or two of the prospects will pan out well enough to equal the value of the loss of the superstar.
Those that say the Twins are asking too much for Santana may be right. Those that are saying that they can get Santana cheaper next year, well, they could be right, too. But are they certain? And are they willing to risk it? It’s a gamble.
I’m not a football fan, but I’m torn in regards to the Super Bowl. On one hand, seeing a team go undefeated is pretty amazing, and it would be fun to watch. On the other hand, I’m wired to root for the underdog in most cases, and it would be awesome to see the Giants pull out an amazing victory. How insufferable would Boston fans be if they won? I dread it very much.
The big problem now is that with the relatively recent decision by some small-market teams to use their farm systems to create winning teams, young prospects have been valued all through professional baseball. Even the large-market teams that can afford the superstars are realizing the value of their prospects. This is making the Santana trade very difficult, because his value is hard to judge. How many prospects is a superstar worth? It's not an equal comparison. You might as well ask how many oranges is an electric pencil sharpener worth.
I’ve heard this argument from fans of teams to whom Santana may be traded: "Wait until Santana hits free agency next year! Then we can get him without giving up any prospects!" I think those fans are slightly deluded. For sake of argument, let's pretend that it's the Kansas City Royals going up against the Florida Marlins and Tampa Bay "Devil" Rays. Let's say the Twins worked out a deal to get four of the Royals prospects/rookies for Santana. Now it's up to the Royals to give Santana a contract he likes (say six years for $140 million), he'll accept the trade (what with the no-trade clause), and the deal is done.
Let's say they wait until November, when Santana becomes a free agent. Now the Royals offer Santana the contract the would've offered him now. But then the Marlins come by and say, "We'll give you six years for $150 million." The Rays pipe up and offer seven years for $160 million." The Royals now have to decide whether it's the years or the money that are interesting Santana. Will six years for $170 do it, or seven years for $170? What is it he wants?” In the end, they could end up paying more for Santana next year than they would've paid those prospects for the years of his contract. (Monetarily, anyway.) And with a strong starting pitcher, they might have a World Series ring or two--while he wouldn’t be solely responsible for it, he could be the final push to get it.
What factors are involved in the decision-making of prospects versus a veteran? First, prospects/rookies aren't that expensive (if Santana were traded, it's likely the entire Twins rotation could cost the Twins approximately $2 million, at $400,000 each for Baker, Bonser, Slowey, Perkins, and Blackburn (or whoever is picked up in the trade)). The earliest they can become expensive is when they reach arbitration, which is after three years (or certain cases, two years). The earliest they can file for free agency is after six years. So years 3-6 (or 4-6), can be more expensive, but since they're not in the midst of a bidding war, the prices are still often relatively cheap. Thus, for the six years of Santana's proposed contract, the prospects and rookies would be relatively cheap--and if the prospects are young enough who don’t make the majors immediately, they could well be cheap after Santana's contract is over. Finally, there are no guarantees with prospects. A trade could be 5-for-1, and if all 5 fizzle, it could be a bust trade for the team getting more players. That's why superstars generally command multiple prospects: usually one or two of the prospects will pan out well enough to equal the value of the loss of the superstar.
Those that say the Twins are asking too much for Santana may be right. Those that are saying that they can get Santana cheaper next year, well, they could be right, too. But are they certain? And are they willing to risk it? It’s a gamble.
I’m not a football fan, but I’m torn in regards to the Super Bowl. On one hand, seeing a team go undefeated is pretty amazing, and it would be fun to watch. On the other hand, I’m wired to root for the underdog in most cases, and it would be awesome to see the Giants pull out an amazing victory. How insufferable would Boston fans be if they won? I dread it very much.
Labels: G-g-g-girl, I'm probably never going to use that tag again so here's another longer tage I'll never use again, Johan Santana
posted by thisisbeth | 8:02 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home