26 November 2007

The Santana Question: To Trade or Not to Trade?

Johan Santana is the 800-lb. gorilla.
















Stumble Upon Toolbar


Yankkeefan said...

Let Joba, Hughes, or Kennedy have the chance to become the next Santana or even better Beckett. Here's why they all will be considerablly cheaper for the Yankees for years down the road. Even with their resources they are on the hook with huge contracts on even the Yankees must have a tipping point. BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY SANTANA IS A 6 or 7 inning pitcher, come playoffs your horse (See Beckett or even Carmona)has to go 8 or even 9 to be the type of number 1 that wins post season games. The Yankees haven't had that since their last Championship, and no team has won a World Championship without one since (except possiblly St. Louis who had someone who pitch like one for the playoffs anyway). Now all of these 3 young pitchers have a chance to be the KIND OF HORSE the Yankees need and Santana is not (just see how the Yankees have gotten to him in the post season). Give them Melky, Horne, Austin Jackson, and either Tabata, Rasner,Karstens, or Olendorf. That is plenty and if not it is not a good deal for the Yankees. Don't cave let the Redsox give up Ellsbury and Lestor or Buckholtz (which they won't, and who cares if the Mets get him don't overpay and get Haren instead for a more resonable price!

Anonymous said...

well hes a 6 or 7 inning pitcher because the twins don't let him pitch longer than that. They have him on a pitch count on him almost all of the time of 100-110. Please be informed before you go assuming things that you obviously have no knowledge of.

Travis said...

Beckett is NOT better than Santana. Not in any way, shape or form. He doesn't pitch a smany innings, doesn't have the track record in the regular season. Yes, he has two WS rings. So does Chad Curtis. Doesn't make him a better player than Vladimir Guererro.

Santana throws a lot of pitches because you have to if you're gonna strike out a batter per inning or more. That limits him to about 7 innings most of the time, but he also gives you 7 innings most of the time, which is more than most pitchers can say. Beckett averaged almost exactly the same number of innings per start as Santana this year, but Santana started four more games because Beckett's kinda brittle. Santana has made a LOT more starts, pitched a lot more innings in the last four seasons, and doesn't need extra rest like Beckett, which means fewer starts by pitchers at the back end of the rotation.

As for the playoffs, Santana could very well have similar credentials to Beckett if he had been handled differently. He's got a 2.92 ERA as a starter in the postseason, and in two starts against the 2004 Yankees, who scored almost 900 runs, second best in MLB, he allowed one earned run in 12 innings. Not his fault his manager allowed him to average only 90 pitches in his two starts.

As for the "Ace" you supposedly need to win the WS, well, that's just poppycock. The 2005 ChiSox had four solid pitchers, but no great ones (None of them got a single 1st place vote for the CYA). The 2003 Marlins didn't have a legitimate, established ace either. They just got hot at the right time.

Ditto for the 2002 Angels. Jarrod Washburn? Ramon Ortiz? Kevin Appier? Which of these guys was a "HORSE" in the 2002 World Series? The Anaheim starters averaged les than 4.5 innings per start and a 7.84 ERA in the 7 game series, with ZERO quality starts. They won with good relief pitching and timely hits, not a horse to anchor the rotation.

While the Yankees were winning 3 out of 4 World Series back in the 1990's, they got exactly two 8-inning starts in 19 World Series games. Two. Doesn't sound to me like you need a HORSE to with the WS.

Yankkeefan said...

Check Josh Beckett(Marlins, Red Sox)check Randy Johnson, Check Curt Schilling (Diamondbacks, Red Sox), Check how the Yankees lost in the postseason the last 7 years it was mainly when they could not match the opposing teams Ace. Period done end of question. One of the few times they won a series was against guess who, the Twins and Santana. If they can get him without giving up one of those 3 fine, if not they don't need him. Let the Redsox sell their soul. Actually if both the Yankees and Redsox are smart and don't give in, the team who gets him may do so for less then what is being bantered around right now. I mean reports today had Coco Crisp as a key part of the trade, if that's the case maybe the Yankees can add Farnsworth or Mussina to the trade (if they pick up most of the tab) I know that will never happen, but thet are spare parts right now like Crisp is. Don't give in let the Sox part with Ellsbury, Lester, and Buckholtz the Yankees have the blueprint for beating Santana anyway.

Travis said...

"Period done end of question?" Hardly.

Beckett has pitched well in the postseason, no question there, but he was hardly an "ace" in 2003 with the Marlins. He only pitched 142 innings and was 9-8 before the postseason. Even as well as he pitched then, they harldy scored any runs for him, so he went 2-2 in the postseason. You need both pitching and offense. Schilling in 2001 and 2004, definitely an Ace, but this year, he was basically a solid, 6-inning pitcher. Just because he's a big name doesn't make him an ace, and just because he pitches couple of good games once or twice in the postseason doesn't make him a workhorse.

As for the Yankees, they got to the Indians' starters this year. It was the bullpens that they couldn't match up. Other than Carmona's CG, they INdians starters gave up 11 runs in 15 innings. The Yankees were worse than that, of course, but the Tribe's aces didn't dominate them.

In 2006 the Yankees' ace, Chien-Ming Wang, won his start. The problem again was that the rest of the Yankees's starters couldn't keep pace with the Tigers. It wasn't for want of a single ace, it was the need for three or four guys they could count on to keep them in the game.

In 2005 the Yankees got two Quality Starts (6+ IP, 3 or fewer ER) from their starters compared to none for Anaheim, but the Angels won because their bullpen was untouchable, just like in 2002. In 2004, as we all remember, the team just fell apart in thsoe final 4 games against Boston, after looking like they were ready to roll over anyone in their path. And your reference to them beating Santana just makes my point for me, and negates yours: the presence of an Ace does not guarantee victory. And don't say that Santana just "doesn't know how to win" or some crap like that. The man has two Cy Young Awards. I think he knows how to win. His manager, well, that's another question...

My point is twofold:

1) The Twins are not s stupid as to take a handful of the Yankees spare parts for the Best Pitcher in Baseball. Kartens? Rasner? COme on, be serious. Without some kind of blue-chip, ready-for-prime-time player, there's no deal. With Joba, Kennedy and Hughes, the Yankees can spare one of these along with a few other parts (Like Austin, Melky, and/or Tabata) and still have two top-notch pitching prospects on the roster. They can spare it, and if they can work it out, Santana is worth the money and the talent they'll spend.

2) You don't NEED an 8 or 9 inning starter to win in the postseason. There are lots of dfferent ways to do it, and there's no guarnatee that your Cy Young winner will pitch a shutout in the postseason or that someone like Jeff Weaver or Bobby Jones or Jose Lima won't.