Bam! Santana trade!
From ESPN, the Mets got him. Deal’s held up as they see how many dump trucks of money they’ll need to drive up to Santana’s house. The cost:
If New York can work out a contract agreement with Minnesota, the Mets will send outfielder Carlos Gomez and pitchers Phil Humber, Deolis Guerra and Kevin Mulvey to the Twins.
Presumably, they mean “with Santana” there.
Wow. I didn’t see that coming. What’s that mean to the Bedard market?
Dave adds: This package of talent isn’t even close to what the M’s are giving up for Bedard. Gomez is a nice prospect, but he’s nothing close to Adam Jones. He projects as a solid CF down the line, but he’s not an elite young player. Guerra is the Mets version of Chris Tillman – good arm, not close to the majors, work to do. Humber and Mulvey are both moderate upside guys who might make decent back-end starters someday.
The M’s equivalent of this deal would be something like Jeff Clement, Chris Tillman, Wladimir Balentien, and Matt Tuiasasopo (they don’t have pitchers that are good comps for Humber/Mulvey, as they go for more high upside/risk arms).
The Yankees and Red Sox didn’t budge on their stance to not include their studly young major league players. The Mets didn’t even give up their best prospect! Next time someone tells you the M’s are paying market price for Bedard, you can send a swam of bees after them.
Photo from .A.A.’s photo stream at Flickr, used under the Creative Commons license
I’m just glad he’s out of the American League.
I think it’s clear — this news has dramatically reduced the market for Erik Bedard.
Willie Boom-Boom for Bedard straight up. If no, the deal walk away.
Sad to think of Gomez destroying his knees in his 20′s on that turf. I hope he gets out of Minny somehow ASAP.
It’s two years of Bedard, one of Santana.
So if Seattle trades for Bedard, has a crappy record, fires everyone, and gets a new GM who wants to start over, this sets the market price for Bedard next offseason. That’s one way to spin it…
Dear Lord, I may have to consider taking Santana with the #1 pick if I am so lucky in my fantasy league. That man will dominate — in the NL and in the home park that arguably most inflates strikeouts.
Katie, bar the door!
The Mets just got ridiculously good. I dont’ know if one could ever be a “lock” for 20 wins, but holy @#$!, he’s probably the best bet in baseball to do it now. Hell, he might get 25.
According to Gammonds on ESPN:
- None of the four guys the Mets gave up for Santana would be in the top ten of the Yankees or Red Sox prospects
According to Gammons on ESPN:
- None of the four guys the Mets gave up for Santana would be in the top ten of the Yankees or Red Sox prospects
Did the Mets just get Santana for less than the M’s are reportedly offering for Bedard?
When the Jones deal gets done you should put up a photo like that one, except with the guy getting punched in the groin. That would be fitting, I think.
You know, somehow Bavasi will think that this makes the price of Bedard go UP!! He really might be that delusional.
It’s two years of Bedard, one of Santana.
That’s not correct. The deal includes a 72-hour window for the Mets to negotiate a new contract with Santana. If they don’t reach an agreement, the Mets can kill the deal. Santana just turned down 5/$100 from the Twins, so a new deal will likely be more like 7/$140.
So it appears the Mets are given up much less talent for seven years of Santana than the Mariners would be surrendering for two years of Bedard + the hope of signing Bedard to an extension.
Every team trying to trade for a #1 starter (thats you Seattle), should try and make a trade now when the value is drastically reduced….The Twins got owned here.
Would this deal be equivilant to if they yanked Jones out of the deal and offered Baltimore everything else?
Well thank god. The baseball gods have intervened once again.
It’s kind of funny because Carlos Gomez was pulled from his winter team yesterday and said the Mets were just flat out Lying to everyone:
From Rototimes.com:
Carlos Gomez was pulled from his winter league team yesterday, leading to speculation that he was involved in a trade. However, the Mets have said it was their plan to limit Gomez’s games, and that this was not a prelude to a deal, according to the NY Post. Gomez’s name has been mentioned prominently in the Johan Santana trade talks.
By the time Gomez is worth a darn, the Twins will be playing their home games on grass again. New ballpark opens in ’10.
Twins fan here. Very disappointed. I’m hoping that the Twins’ scouts see something I don’t, but it looks like our GM overplayed his hand and had to pull the trigger on a subpar deal with the Yanks and Sox scaling back their offers.
It’s odd to me that the Mets didn’t gun for Bedard instead of Santana.
Oh wait, no it isn’t, because you can fleece Bavasi for a $#!+load more talent than you can the Mets.
Actually, someone straighten me out on the economics of this. Bedard could actually be worth more than Santana for the team that owns him. Because Johan has a no-trade clause, he pretty much has to sign-off on anything the Twins attempt to do, which means he gets to negotiate a new contract as a condition of being traded. And the twins are desperate to trade him, because they can’t afford to resign him if he becomes a free agent, and they’re not contenders in 2008. That means he can only be traded to wealthy teams, those able to afford his free agent value, but the wealthy teams mostly have to pay Santana, not the Twins. (Next time someone asks why the economic model of baseball is grossly unjust, this would be a pretty good example.)
Bedard is getting $3.5 mil for the next two years, which means the taker pays a pitance for a top flight southpaw for two years, which means that he can be traded to almost any team, and the trader can ask for a lot more to make the offer, since you’re not desperate to get some value out of him until next off-season.
Anyway, feel free to straighten me out on this because I’m just learning the ropes a MLB transactions.
It seems to me that Santana pulled a Griffey on the Twins. From what Gammons says, Santana loves the idea of the NL because he likes to hit, which would seem to hint that he pushed the Twins toward a deal with the Mets.
Not sure it’s really the same as what the M’s faced with Junior, but the situation looks at least slightly analogous.
#3 – The Twins will have a new stadium starting 2010.
I think that’s about right. That’s how I’ve been reading it for months. Of course, one could make a pretty good case that Santana will be better than Bedard the next two years. And for the position the Mets are in (the NL is a toss-up, favored to win division without him, teams grouped much closer together records-wise) Johan is probably worth more to them than Bedard (who’s negatives we’ve slightly touched on).
The Haren deal was a much better haul.
What are the odds Angelos got wind of this and that’s why the bottom suddenly dropped out of the Bedard/Jones deal?
argh,
Why would that make Angelos pull out? The fact that the Mets are now out of the running for Bedard and were able to get a better pitcher for less prospects? Wouldn’t that make Angelos want to pull the trigger before the Bavasi came to his senses?
Wow. Did the Twins overplay their hand or what? It’s a 2-step process:
1) Get the Yanks and Sox to bid against each other.
2) Accept the best offer.
How the Twins managed the more difficult step 1 but failed to perform step 2 is amazing. It’s like getting two Swedish supermodels to fight over your naked body . . . and then going flaccid.
I am completely out to sea on this. Help me: 1) Twins are not competitive with their offense and a Liriano/Santana combo (so need to trade Santana) but WE will be competitive with Felix/Bedard supported by our offense?
2) Mets get rights to Santana for spare parts but WE must gut our farm system for Bedard and are not even considering Santana. Okay, then, I am now up to speed.
Exactly. This makes the trade even worse because the M’s can’t say they paid a high price due to the “market rate.”
Yeah, the Mariners gave up more, but Santana really only had one team to go to, so the Mets didn’t have to bid against anybody else (that we know of). The Orioles most likely had other suitors for Bedard and the Mariners had pay the price of supply and demand, and Adam Jones was the price. vr, Xei
xeifrank
Santana was going to one of three teams: Boston, NYM, NYY. Who is really trying to get Bedard? I only know of four teams: SEA, CIN, NYM, LAAA. I’m not sure how serious Anaheim was. And now the Mets are out of it.
Re: 24
I have no idea (which is why I asked) but you can at least imagine that another team out there that was hanging back, waiting on the Santana shoe to drop and hoping they get him might now be more willing to get into a bidding war with Bavasi. Or at least that Angelos might fantasize that happening. Big coincidences like this always interest me — even if, occasionally, they’re just that.
et_blankenship
Eew. Did you HAVE to say that?
That the Mets were able to trade spare parts for Johann Santana makes the deal Bavasi is reported to have offered for Bedard look utterly ludicrous.
I hope this is like a nasty dose of reality to the Mariners, and shakes Bill out of his dream.
What’s worth more? 1 year of Santana at 10M and 2 draft picks, or no Santana and the package they got?
Well, uh, wait a minute.
Whats the estimation for how much cash is involved? I’m not actually sure I could hear a number that would ‘make up’ for the differences in talent that the M’s “gave” up vs. the Mets, but the cash money should be a factor in the evaluation.
Then again, the M’s probably suspect to get more from Bedard on a per-dollar basis than the Mets will get for Santana.
What does the trade say about the Twin’s front office?
“Who is really trying to get Bedard? I only know of four teams: SEA, CIN, NYM, LAAA.”
- CIN: gave Baltimore the bird when the O’s demanded Jay Bruce plus frosting.
- NYM: have not been serious about Bedard since they turned their attention to Johan.
- LAAALACA: will say and do anything if it might result in the M’s doing something stupid. (Where did you hear the Angels were even part of this?)
- SEA: is obviously fueled by paranoia and the crazy idea that (Bedard + Wilkerson) – (Jones + Sherrill + Blue Sky + $$$) = Glory.
Bedard is getting $3.5 mil for the next two years…
Actually, isn’t he getting between $5 and $8 mil for the next two years, pending the arbitration ruling?
Bedard will get $7-$8 million in ’08. He asked for $6 million in arby, but the M’s never go to arby, so they’ll give him more than that to sign.
He’ll then get $12-$15 million in arby next year.
What about the perspective that the NTC pretty much limited where Johan ended up, thereby ultimately reducing the ‘cost’ it took to acquire him?
Isn’t Santana going to get about $13M next year? Got that figure from TwinsGeek which was a recommended Twins blog here in that 06 thread…
Santana will make 13.25M in 08 according to mlb4u.com.
The NTC limited the bidding to Boston and the two New York clubs. It’s like complaining because only Bill Gates and Warren Buffet showed up to your yard sale.
The Twins held out for a ridiculous package and no one bit. They ended up getting what teams always get when they trade all-star veterans – a good package of prospects, but no stud young major leaguers.
The Mariners continue to fail to understand how to price things correctly and paid through the nose.
Yeah, I believe he asked for 8mil and the O’s have offered 6mil/yr.
Based on what the Mets are giving up for Santana, shouldn’t the M’s now be able to replace Wlad for Jones in the deal to make it comparable?
However, assuming the deal goes through with us giving up the farm, is there an option seen as worthwhile or better than Wilkerson in RF by the M’s blogosphere?
Seems he’s just adding to our attempt at cloning Vidro for 5 starting spots. Wouldn’t Patterson or Lofton at least give us a few more options and/or a different skillset to utilize on offense and defense for a year?
blankenship…Are you saying that there’s no competition for the M’s in getting Bedard? Do you think there was any competition for the Mets getting Santana?
I’m so tired of the word Ace that I may never play poker again…
38:
The NTC did not exclude three of the richest and most richly stocked teams, all of whom submitted competing offers, all of which were better than the final Gomez package. The scenario was perfect. The Twins simply shot themselves in the cold foot.
Is anyone pointing out the difference between these two trades in the Geoff Baker blog comments? It’s really hard not to see that a better pitcher, locked up to a long deal (presumably), just got traded for less than the Mariners are giving up. I’m sure people who want the Bedard trade can still find a way to argue around this, but I can’t conceive of how.
et_blankenship
There was a post on mlbtraderumors.com, two nights ago I think, that said Anaheim was getting involved to try and block the M’s from Bedard. Then whoever the writer was, made another post claiming that it was a “fake” rumor. He claimed that somebody used his email address to send in the Anaheim rumor. So there was never anything really to it.
scraps,
better pitcher,
almost certainly more money,
almost certainly a long term contract.
but in general, especially with pitchers,
teams want to pay less money,
and not have a ridiculously long contracts. Giant contracts for long periods of time can turn into untradeable, unreleasable millstones. And we of all people should be familiar with those.
I saw what Gammons said, but I think these guys are better than that. I mean here we see them as the 3-4 and 6 prospects in the Mets system.
http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/prospects/features/263445.html
(granted this is a year old now…)
Gomez for one, is supposed to be SICK fast, always popular in MIN. (there is no question I’m getting him in my fantasy keeper league…)
I haven’t followed Humber or Mulvaney all that much, but it’s ridiculous to pretend this is “spare parts” on the part of the Mets organization.
43
You have to assume there are other teams lying in the weeds, waiting for the current storyline to play itself out . . . but the O’s current demands are rediculous. The M’s have gone above and beyond what any other team is willing to give, so basically yes, Seattle’s only competition for Bedard right now is Angelos.
Did I use the word Ace? I hope not. I never use the word Ace . . . except now. Twice even.
fetish, are you saying we’re willing to trade more for Bedard because we’re only committed to him (and he to us) for two years??
If we get Bedard, we better sign him for a long while. Otherwise we may as well turn in our Mariner caps and put on Oakland ones.
The most recent BA Top 10 Prospect List for the Mets:
http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/prospects/features/265152.html
is there any way Santana’s package could cause M’s to back out or change the deal? I mean, would it even be possible to stop at this point or are we just waiting on Angelos to approve?
Wow. I didn’t see that coming.
I kind of did. Neither the Yankees nor the Red Sox wanted to give up what they thought Santana was worth; the real factor in their negotiations was each preventing the other from getting him. They were both happy to play half-hearted chicken with crossed fingers behind their back. The Twins, on the other hand, seemed to be asking the moon like they really didn’t want either team to get him. Possibly they misjudged the braintrust running the Yankees (nobody seems to know which Little Boss is in charge). Trading him elsewhere in the AL probably wasn’t something they really wanted to do anyway, since that would mean they (like anybody else in the AL) would probably have to go through Santana to get to the WS. But in the NL you don’t have quite the deep pockets, and the Mets are at the top of that short list. While the Yankees are probably going to be annoyed at the attention this gets the Mets, you could probably hear a big exhalation of relief around the offices of both the Red Sox and the Yankees at this news. I still don’t understand why the Twins didn’t take either of the Red Sox offers or the Yankees one over this, though.
From what Gammons says, Santana loves the idea of the NL because he likes to hit, which would seem to hint that he pushed the Twins toward a deal with the Mets.
Wow, that would be crazy if it’s true. It seems more likely to me that he liked what pitching in the NL would do for his stats and place in baseball history, and what pitching in the NY market would do for his off-field deals. But hey, maybe the guy likes to swing the bat too.
Wouldn’t that make Angelos want to pull the trigger before the Bavasi came to his senses?
I don’t think that’s something he has to worry about, alas.
1) Twins are not competitive with their offense and a Liriano/Santana combo (so need to trade Santana) but WE will be competitive with Felix/Bedard supported by our offense?
The Twins have to get by both Detroit and Cleveland to win their division; the M’s just have to get past LA. Of course, not being able to get past two teams is no better or worse than not being able to get past one, and since the M’s aren’t going to, it is all just fantasy. But I think that’s the “thinking” in the M’s FO.
5 – Just so happens that we’ve already done our draft… justifies my pick so much more now
(Note I play with buddies in college who I won’t be around to start the season so we had to pick early)
On Topic: and we’re about to give up Jones + for Bedard. And people wonder why we hate the deal so much.
I had no idea Bedard was going to make that much. I’m now more opposed to this deal than ever.
I really hope the Mariners can at least use this as leverage to take Jones out of the deal. I have a feeling Bavasi is more concerned about his job than anything else though, and figures Bedard gives him a slightly better chance of not getting fired than Jones in the majors and prospects for the future.
Bender – Jeff Weaver made $8.3 million last year.
Bedard for around $7 million this season, and $15m next year would be considered a bargain. If only the package of players leaving wasn’t so bad.
Carson,
I know price wise it’s a bargain, but I didn’t think it was that much. Considering we’re giving up what we are this makes me upset with Mr. Bavasi
hmm. this afternoon’s walk home has a new caller theme: the M’s should trade for Bedard, even though they aren’t a playoff team, because if they fail in ’09, then Bavasi is booted and Bedard is trade bait for 2010.
speaking of radio, the hot stove show lists Jim Hunter, Jim Street, Richie Sexson, Carlos Silva, & Rich Amaral tonight
Personally I didn’t need this to be upset with Mr Bavasi, it does make me MORE upset though.
ok, I had no spelling errors. I don’t know what year it is, however.
joser –
Wow, that would be crazy if it’s true. It seems more likely to me that he liked what pitching in the NL would do for his stats and place in baseball history, and what pitching in the NY market would do for his off-field deals. But hey, maybe the guy likes to swing the bat too.
Seriously, it is true. Gammons said in on ESPN that Santana is a great hitter for a pitcher, and that he loves the hitting aspect of the game. I’m sure what you say about NY, his stats, and his place in history all factored into it as well.
Let’s face it, he’s a superstar with a no-trade clause. He has all the power. I wouldn’t be surprised if all these things added up to the Twins being pushed (not sure how forcefully) into a deal with the Mets.
Bedard’s not going to get $15 million in arbitration next year even if he wins 20 games and the M’s win the World Series. Based on comparable players with comparable service time, he’s likely to get between $9 and $11 million if he’s not re-signed to a long term deal by Seattle. That estimate could go up or down depending on the year he has in ’08, but it’s not gonna be $15 mil.
Putting it another way, Bedard has about the same chance at getting $15 mil in arbitration in ’09 as Adam Jones has of hitting 600 career home runs and stealing 600 career bases…
The W – Correct or not, that was an awful comparison. It nearly rivals the comment from Sunday that “Bedard is Moyer.”
Small sample of course, but Santana has hit .258/.281/.355 over 31 AB in his ML career. Last year, NL pitchers hit .146/.177/.188. Santana looks the part when he’s up there, so it’ll be interesting to see what he does at the plate going forward.
I’d take the “Bedard is Moyer” comparison over that one (again, correct or not). At least that one was comparing apples to oranges. This one is comparing apples to freight trains.
It is a shame the M’s couldn’t fully pursue Santana, hopefully this helps move the Bedard trade in the right direction, whatever that may be. Nice to see two front offices in the Twins and the O’s acting more inept than ours.
I’m sick to my stomach thinking about how much we’re bending over backward for this. I guess I should just try to enjoy it. Close me eyes and go someplace else in my head.
Knowing the Mariners and Bavasi, they might increase their offer to the Orioles for Bedard–instead of decreasing it in light of the Santana trade.
#19. That’s probably one of the reasons Beane always gets rid of his best players before this happens. At least he gets something in return however…
Based on comparable players with comparable service time, he’s likely to get between $9 and $11 million if he’s not re-signed to a long term deal by Seattle.
This would be awesome if you weren’t totally wrong. But you are, so its not. Dontrelle Willis was going to get $10 million in arbitration this year despite only 4 years of ML service and coming off a disastrous 2007 season. Bedard will have 5 years of service heading into next year’s arbittration hearings, and the comparable players who get to arbitration just one year away from free agency ask for way, way more than $11 million.
Derek Jeter asked for $18.5 million in his fifth year arbitration request – in 2001. In today’s baseball environment, that’s closer to $23 million. Fifth year arbitration eligible all-stars get paid through the nose. $12 to $15 million may be a conservative estimate, honestly. Roger Clemens asked for $22 million in arbitration two years ago – Bedard’s not going to have Clemens service time or track record, but your $11 million figure is not even close to reality.
Bedard will get $7-$8 million in ‘08. He asked for $6 million in arby, but the M’s never go to arby, so they’ll give him more than that to sign.
Dave is this sarcasm, a typo, or just written so I don’t understand it
If Bedard asked for $6M, why would the M’s pay him more that than, unless they were locking him up for 2009 as well? Or did he ask for $6M LAST year and it will be more this year?
Monetarily, doesn’t the difference between Bedard at $8M/$15M and Santana at $20M/$20M/$20M/$20M/$20M/$20M/$20M come down to a savings of $22M on Bedard over the first 2 years? That is, of course, if Santana signs an extension that precludes his present year contract and Bedard signs no extension.
Spelling good, math bad…8+15=23…20+20=40…40-23=17…
17M difference
It was a typo – the Orioles offered him $6 million, he asked for $8 million, and teams generally settle around the midpoint. Since Bill Bavasi has never gone to arbitration with a player (not once, ever, in his entire GM career), we can assume that he won’t go to arbitration with Bedard, which means that he’s going to get at least the midpoint figure for 2008. That puts his ’08 salary at $7 to $8 million.
Bavasi may be arb avoiding but what are the statistics (are the statistics available?) about offer/demand/outcomes on arbs?
Maybe Bavasi is a smart guy. I’m just asking.
Most teams are smart enough not to go to arbitration with their players. It’s a terrible system that fosters all kinds of ill will, and it’s generally not worth the relatively small cost savings to trash one of your players to their face, then ask them to play well for you the next week.
But, when teams do go to arbitration, they usually win. They’re better at it then the agents at presenting cases than the arbitrators will like to hear.
Except when your player’s name is Freddy Garcia. (That’s sarcasm, folks…)
That’s a reversal of the early years, isn’t it? And it’s held for quite some time?
Has Bavasi avoided arb hearings as a matter of showing his guys respect? I know he has a reputation for going the distance if possible concerning a player’s best interests.
Who would have thought the M’s would pay Erik Bedard less than Jeff Weaver. What is the world coming to?
That is the difference between a free market and a not so fair one….
“Jim Hunter, Jim Street, Richie Sexson, Carlos Silva, & Rich Amaral tonight”
Awful.
Geoff Baker offers his take on the impact of the Santana trade. The gist of it:
“So, will the M’s change their proposal to the Orioles? I doubt it…. What does Bavasi do? Not much he can do. He’s already shown a willingness to part with Jones as his centerpiece. If he goes to the O’s now and says Jones is out, they laugh in his face, walk away and take their chances next July…. So, despite all the Santana headlines, nothing really changed today.”
Maybe Baker needs a swarm of bees.
Hey guys…enjoy the site even though I don’t necessarily agree with the majority’s opinions all of the time. Hopefully that doesn’t make me uneducated.
I agree with your analysis that Jones is extremely valuable because (among other reasons) he is under team control for the next six years. Can’t it also be true that Johan might not be as valuable as Bedard because of how much the Mets are going to have to pay him (in terms of dollars and years) to convince him to waive his no trade clause? Is Johan for six years and $133 million really worth it? Don’t clubs hate giving out long term deals like that to pitchers, especially ones that will be 35 in the last year of a deal while earning $20-$25 million? If the M’s can sign Bedard for 3-4 years and $45-$60 million, isn’t he more valuable than Santana? Obviously there is a HUGE assumption that the M’s can sign Bedard to a longer term deal, but Bedard’s recent comments seem to indicate that he might be amenable to that. Bedard for fewer committed years and less salary per year would seem to explain why he might be more valuable in a trade, wouldn’t it? I don’t see Johan signing a 3 or 4 year deal, which I’m sure the Mets would prefer.
Take it easy on me boys, this is my first post here.
so, who do we think Andy MacPhail’s “other clubs” who have supposedly recently chimed in are?
Bedard would never sign a 3- or 4- year deal, let alone for such a price.
But even assuming Erik did there’s a chance he won’t be great due to injury history and other factors. Santana, meanwhile, is as close to a guarantee you can get from a starting pitcher. Whether that’s worth an extra __ million a year…
I don’t think anyone would want to compete with what the Mariners are offering for Bedard.
one of the things Jim Hunter (O’s broadcaster) did say on KOMO was that he felt that an extension by Bedard wouldn’t be completely out of the question– ‘maybe not in May’, but down the road, given Seattle’s charms for a quiet, rural kind of guy, the appeal of Safeco to a pitcher, the quality of the team & organization, and balancing security now against the possiblity of injury or poor performance affecting future free agency
I agree with msb. Seattle, except for being on the west coast (less publicity) is a very attractive city to play in.
88: Yeah, give Bedard 3 months of McLaren and I’m sure he’ll be really excited to sign an extension.
If the M’s can sign Bedard for 3-4 years and $45-$60 million, isn’t he more valuable than Santana?
I doubt they’d be able to sign him for that, especially after they just traded half the farm for him, making his agent acutely aware of how much they valued him. 4/60 is $15M/year, roughly what he’d be making through arbitration in ’09. 5/100 would seem to be where the ballpark starts. Unless he flames out between now and then, in which case, oops. Regardless, whatever extension they could sign him for, they could sign him for in two years when his contract expires with some other team.
But, all this talk of extension. Let’s look at a Derek’s payroll commitments post from a few days ago. Between now and 2010, the M’s will have $55 M or so coming off the books, representing Sexson, Batista, Washburn, Beltre, Ibanez, and Vidro. Felix will be due real money by then, and either he’s become the Cy Young candidate we hope he is and we’re paying him north of $15M/year, or else we’re all really unhappy. Throw in Bedard at, say $18M/year (which is probably low, and so is Felix at $15M), and we’ve sucked up $33 M of that $55 M, leaving us $22 M to pay replace:
1 SP, 1 1B, 1 3B, 1 DH, 2 OF (Ibanez plus Jones). That doesn’t account for any other holes that may open up between now and then. Those positions most likely represent our second through fifth most productive hitters, and two of our three best defenders. The only way to fill those slots with equivalent production at $3.5M/year is to fill quite a few with kids coming up through the system, which we half-gutted to get Bedard. I don’t see us re-signing him. Or if we do, I don’t see where the rest of the team comes from.
#89– hey, I’m just passing along the shiny thoughts of one Jim Hunter.
Amazing post, JMHawkins, great analysis.
heck, I don’t know where the rest of the team is coming from this season if they trade for him.
Bavasi can’t think that far ahead; he’s under pressure to win now.
Armstrong and Lincoln don’t seem to have to capability to think that far ahead.
Though, to be fair, the people being deal who are not named Jones seem to be pitchers (if the rumors are right). They’re probably slotting Morrow in as a pitcher, and Wlad would be ready by then, and they might figure Truinfel could step in somewhere. Must be hoping for a farm system surprise….
91 – I hate to argue with such an accurate post, but how about Jeff Clement 1B, Rob Johnson C, Carlos Truinfel 3B, Jeremy Reed RF, and Ryan Rowland-Smith SP. All are major league ready as we type. Then we could pay Bedard big money, and sign an above-average defensively power-hitting LF. DH could be Ibanez (you know they’ll resign him).
Swap Balentein for Reed and I think those replacements are possible. But those are the only obvious holes. Who’s to say 2B or SS (positions that are average at best right now) won’t need upgrades as well?
Rob Johnson and Jeremy Reed are the opposite of major league ready.
As well as Triunfel.
We just don’t have the budget or farm system to support a $50 M rotation. Sure, we could go with Clement, Johnson and Reed, and maybe (hopefully) they’ll all be ready to be everyday ML players by then. But we don’t need a bunch of everyday players. That $55 M in payroll coming off the books between now and ’10 represents more than half our offensive firepower. With those guys off the books, we’re left with Ichiro (age 36 by then), Johjima (34, and a catcher), Lopez (26) and Betancourt (28). I hope Lopez regains his shine, but the odds are, even if he does and Ichiro is still wacking 200+ hits a year by then, that group will be slightly above average at best. Look at it this way – how many All-Stars would that group produce? One, maybe two. If we augment them with “everyday players” then the offense will not be adequate to win a championship, even with a studly rotation. We’d need at least two more All-Star caliber position players to compete in the AL. Reed, Clement et al might be ready to hold down a position, but they won’t be challenging for the MVP. Truinfel? Maybe he’s ready by then, but it’s hard to see him and Ichiro carrying the offense.
Good enough isn’t good enough if you want to be the AL representative in the World Series.
BTW, I’m using All-Star Caliber to mean “one of the top tier guys at their position” and not “someone who gets a lot of fanmail.” There’s probably a better term to use, but the jist is, to be legitmate contenders, we’ll need more than one or two guys who rank near the top of their position.
Dave – How much ‘seasoning’ do you think that Johnson and Jeremy Reed need? I know that Jeremy Reed was starting in 2005-06 but never produced that much, and then he got injured and never came back. Will Reed ever be a major leaguer?
Rob Johnson will never hit – he’s a backup catcher in the making. Reed’s tinkered with his swing enough that if he has any kind of career, it’s now as a 5th OF/bench guy.
[Spiezio]
Baseball is really lame. The game is great, but the MLB is absurd.
The idea of an NTC is insane in a league without a salary cap. The Mets get Johan for peanuts because they’re the mets?
The draft is totally screwed and favors the same handful of teams.
Free agency is totally screwed and favors the same handful of teams.
NTC’s for the best players screws trades too and further favors the same handful of teams.
If ever there was a time to boycott…
Yet in this decade seven different franchises have won eight championships and revenue is at an all-time high.
*shrugs like the time Bud Selig did when there was a tie in the All-Star game*
[Spiezio]
Oh dear.
…that should read “the Mariners WILL continue to display the financial savvy of an Albanian goat-herder at the bottom of a Ponzi-scheme.”
It bears repeating.
I’m not sure if 4/60 is unreasonable for Bedard…if you figure that he’ll get $8 mm this year in arby, $15 mm next year in arby and $20 mm his first two years of free agency. That is $63 mm. A slight discount for a multi-year deal and you get 4/60. I think JMHawkins makes a good argument, but I’m not seeing where we are giving away so many position players in a Bedard deal. What is being reported is Jones and three or four pitchers. If we won’t have position players in the system a few years after a Bedard trade, we won’t have them even if we don’t make the trade (except for AJ). I just wonder where the pitching will come from if we don’t make a trade. With Bavasi’s track record, I see Felix and a bunch of overpaid Washburn-types. I guess we can hope that we figure out how to develop our young pitchers, but I don’t think we’ll be able to count on guys that are 18 and 19 years old for at least 3-4 years (probably longer), if they make it at all. My main concern is what is going to happen if we don’t get Bedard and Bavasi still thinks he needs to find a starter to save his job. That is really how the Soriano/Horam trade came about last year – BB panicked when he didn’t land his other targets. I just don’t want to see Bavasi trade Jones for Ian Snell or Joe Blanton. At least Bedard is really good.
It’s not Bedard or nothing.
There is a great post from Dave Cameron in the archives about the value of the Mariners raiding (believe it or not) the Devil Rays for their excess of good young starters.
Are they as good as Bedard? No, not close by themselves. But does say, J.P. Howell, Edwin Jackson and Adam Jones give you more wins than Bedard and an outfield defence that consists solely of Ichiro – most likely, and at a fraction of the cost.
Forgive me if the names are off; I’m about to head to bed.
Damn, that was fussy Derek. That was a good post AND I nailed the notorious Piñeiro spelling.
Humbug.
JMHawkins makes a good argument, but I’m not seeing where we are giving away so many position players in a Bedard deal.
My main point is that if we’re paying $50 M for our 1-2-3 pitchers, we can’t afford to sign the position player’s we’ll need (because the system is bare), especially if we need one more because the gave up a young, cheap, good outfielder. Plus, if we not only trade away a bunch of our farm pitching, put also relegate Morrow to the pen (it’ll be another year there for him if we do the Bedard deal, since the rotation would be Felix + 4 guys averaging $9M/year or so) and give up on Baek, we’re that much thinner for filling out our 4-5 slots in 2010 with cheap players, and non-train-wreck starting pitchers seem to run $8+M on the FA market.
Even with optimistic best-case scenarios for Ichiro, Lopez, Bentancourt, Johjima, Felix, Silva and Bedard, I don’t think the M’s could construct better than a 90 win team in 2010. 90 wins won’t get it done. We’ve got to find more home-grown pitching, and Bedard ain’t home grown. As good as he is, he’s the wrong direction.
Too many typos in that last comment. Time to go to bed.
The Sun guy is a little more confident that the trade will eventually happen, though he also says it’s still very uncertain. But from today’s blog:
By the way, the next time you see the words “Jones†and “hip†in the same sentence, it will pertain to the music he’s listening to on his iPod.
If you think it’s all about the money, sure. The teams and players have agreed to recognize that there are circumstances when a player would like to have some control over where they end up playing, and that under some circumstances clubs are willing to negotiate that. Given that the players do have ordinary human desires about where to live and work and with whom, just like the rest of us, that’s a decent and human thing to have in a bargaining agreement.
I would agree to an NTC if there’s some kind of quid pro quo … for example, if I re-sign with Seattle for less than market value because I really love it here and want to raise my family in the area, I want an assurance that I’ll be staying in exchange for giving up the extra FA dollars.
If Seattle’s not willing to give me that assurance, there’s no incentive for me to take less than free market value to sign.
[violated terms of comment submission button]
“My main point is that if we’re paying $50 M for our 1-2-3 pitchers, we can’t afford to sign the position player’s we’ll need”
I think, given the expanding revenue in MLB, you have to think the M’s will be able to support a $125M+ payroll in 2-3 years. You can do $50M for SP, as long as you’re generating cheap talent somewhere.
Not if you’re impatiently giving it away for other talent.
Make no mistake, this move thins out the farm system considerably. I just think that it’s considerably too much.
[violated terms of comment submission button]
I love the Mod’s here. Thanks for the never ending battle against mediocrity.
I don’t follow the NL as well as I should. Is there a chance of Pedro even becoming half of his former self? The thought of him having a resurgence, pitching the day after Johan is just insane.
The draft is the most ‘fair’ part of the entire system. The Hardball Times had a great article in this year’s annual about teams using the draft. Too many teams refuse to pay over slot and therefor players fall to teams like the BoSox and Yanks (who will pay overslot money) and that’s why it feels unfair.
I’d like to circle back to the post topic, specifically Derek’s question about what the Santana trade means for Bedard’s market.
I don’t believe the two are remotely similar for one simple reason: Santana is in control of his (baseball) fate, while Bedard is not.
The Mets are essentially trading for a negotiating window for Johan; the M’s are trading for the next 2 years of Bedard. The difference in value in those 2 situations is very large, and I think the Twins’ return reflects that. Bedard *should* command much more in trade, as he is bound to his next team for 2 years – and at reasonable cost. I’d even argue that Bedard is *more* attractive since you’re only buying his next two seasons without several more expensive seasons tacked on.
So – to directly compare the two exchanges is misleading; the circumstances are entirely different. If the Twins’ side is to be believed, Johan has exercised his power to force his way to a new team. Any interested party recognized that a trade would be contingent on an extension – Johan’s requirement for waiving his NTC – and valued the price in talent surrendered accordingly. Which means the Yankees would have been wildly overpaying if they had surrendered Hughes, knowing Santana was willing to waive his NTC specifically to join them.
I’m not saying the Twins extracted the best return possible; I don’t think they used the trade to address their primary need for top-level offensive talent. I’m also not suggesting the M’s are offering the “right” amount for Bedard – a 5-player package headlined by Adam Jones is simply too much for Bedard. But given the circumstances, the Twins had far less leverage to extract sufficient value for Santana.
Dave, how much impact do you think the Santana trade has had on Bedard’s, if any?
The draft, of course, being the most fair to teams.
That’s an important distinction. It’s horrible to the players.
Sure the Twins and O’s situations are different. The O’s – M’s talks are analogous to 2 suitors deciding if they are compatible. It’s unfortunate that the M’s have taken the stance of the nerdy guy willing to do anything and everything required to score a date for the prom.
Bedard has value because he’s under club control for 2 years and he has a proven MLB pedigree. Jones has value because he’s under club control for 6 years. The other players being offered by the M’s have value because they are prospects or proven records and are also under club control.
Unfortunately the M’s are incapable of negotiating from a position of even strength. They’ve taken the stance of being the club in need and lost hand in the negotiation process. Under Bavasi have the M’s ever said “here’s a good player/prospect we’ll listen to offers on. Bring us your best deal and we’ll listen. If we don;t like any offers we’ll keep the player.”
Instead we always seem to be saying either “here’s a player we want to get rid of, we’ll take whatever you want to offer” or “We want your player, we really, REALLY want him. What will it take to pry him away from you?”
Derek, my vote for the next submission button is:
“I read this thread before stating/asking about something that’s been covered 20 times.”
Crud. That’s too long.
Hey everybody, welcome to Day Three of the Circus.
The draft, of course, being the most fair to teams.
That’s an important distinction. It’s horrible to the players.
Hey, the players are playing a kid’s game for a job. They should just shut up and put in their 12 hour days, spend 9 months out of the year away from their families, wear out their bodies and quietly go away when they’re finally chucked onto the scrap heap in their mid thirties.
The draft, of course, being the most fair to teams.
That’s an important distinction. It’s horrible to the players.
Yes, I totally agree. I should’ve made that clear when I was posting. For that post I was commenting on what is most fair from the team’s perspective.
123:
Peter Angelos? Is that you? McPhail maybe? Seriously . . . Bavasi?
The best offers the Twins received came from the Red Sox and Yankees. Johan’s NTC did not exclude either of those teams. So to say Johan’s NTC diminished the Twins leverage is wrong. The Twins had maximum leverage when they had the Red Sox and Yankees fighting over Johan. It was the Twins fault for not taking advantage of that situation.
Baltimore currently has leverage in the form of one team: Seattle. If the O’s are stalling on the offer, you can bet they are contacting the 28 other organizations to see anyone would care to match or beat the Jones deal. If not, oh well. They would still get an incredible haul from the Mariners. While it’s fun to picture Angelos pounding his fist on his desk, screaming obscenities at McPhail and dreaming of new ways to sabotage the deal (“I got it! Degenerative hip!â€) he is probably just shopping for an 11th hour steal right now.
[quote]“The Mets are essentially trading for a negotiating window for Johan; the M’s are trading for the next 2 years of Bedard.â€[/quote]
No. The Mets will either have Johan for 6 years or they will keep their prospects. The Mets get to decide if they like the contract or not. If the Mets can’t get a deal worked out, they keep their prospects. If they do get a deal worked out, they get Johan for 6 +/- years. Conversely, Seattle would get Bedard for 2 years. I would argue that Bedard has more control over his baseball fate because in 2 years, he can go wherever the hell he wants.
130 – Very funny.
Look, I’m not arguing that the Twins failed to extract maximum value from this deal. Hell, even if the Mets were the only team involved, they failed to get the guy who would have helped them the most in Martinez.
What I’m arguing is that the Twins had the leverage to pull off a much better deal. I mean, what were the Twins offering here? Santana had a blanket NTC; he made it clear he would use it; and he declined a long-term offer from the Twins that essentially announced what it would take to sign him. The Twins choices were hanging onto him for 2008 and getting 2 first-round draft picks, or taking the first concrete offer that trumps those 2 picks. The Mets, Yankees and Sox knew that and bid accordingly.
As you noted, the O’s have no such restrictions. They simply need to select the best package from any team who wants a top-of-rotation starter for 2 years at reasonable cost.
What I’m arguing is that the Santana trade somehow has a direct affect on what the O’s can expect from a trade of Bedard. To me, the situations are so different that there should be no comparison.
If I’m one of the 28 other teams, why would I jump into the Bedard sweepstakes now? The Mariners have already been bidding against themselves, with Baltimore well aware that Bavasi is desperate and clinging to his job by a thread. If Bavasi tried to lower his demands, the Orioles would just call his bluff. The only way the Santana deal affects the Bedard market is if the M’s get out of the bidding, and the status quo for Baltimore is still an ace pitcher with two years left of club control – not a bad deal. Plus, imagine the deal the O’s could get for Bedard at the trading deadline. In other words, there is no reason for them to be in a rush, and every reason for Bavasi to remain in panic mode.
Batgirl’s take on the negotiations:
http://mngameday.blogspot.com/2007/12/gm-2-gm_09.html
Now I’m actually just hoping for a new long analysis post on the trade to push that photo of the girl getting punched way down, so I don’t have to look at it every time I check back here.