PDA

View Full Version : Johan Santana wants $126 mil over 5 year


eastchicagosoxfan
11-22-2007, 07:44 PM
Johan Santana wants $126 million over 5 years to remain a Twin. Assuming they won't pony up to the table, who will? I enjoy watching him work, but I won't miss him against the Sox several times a year.
http://www.startribune.com/509/story/1566916.html

soxfanreggie
11-22-2007, 07:57 PM
$25.2 mil a year...No way. He's one of the best pitchers in the game, but I wouldn't give a contract like that to anyone. If he wants Zito money, take the Zito years too, or at least a 6th. That amount of money is more than $1 million per win he gives you and probably about $800k per start he makes. Take the money and get 2 quality players to replace him for the same amount.

Only team I could see paying that is the Yankees and that's because they have the money freed up from the Rocket. They also have some prospects they would probably give up to get him. In addition, they have a lot of contracts that will be coming up soon: Giambi after they buy him out for $5 mil after this year (frees up $20 mil a year), Abreu wasn't bought out but his contract is up after the '08 season ($16 mil per year), Mussina up after '08 (12 mil), Pavano comes off the books after '08 when they pay him $1.95 for a buyout, and a few others.

They are also desperate for a WS and this would give them a good 1-2 punch with him and Wang

fquaye149
11-22-2007, 08:00 PM
Any one of the big 5 teams will pay him 21 mill.

Likelihood, imo, of where he'll be:

#1: NYY
#2: CHC
#3: LAD
#4: NYM
#5: BOS

soxfanreggie
11-22-2007, 08:18 PM
The thing about that contract...it's $25.2 mil a year. That might knock a few of those teams out.

DoItForDanPasqua
11-22-2007, 08:35 PM
$25.2 mil a year... That amount of money is more than $1 million per win he gives you and probably about $800k per start he makes.

:o:

Frater Perdurabo
11-22-2007, 08:36 PM
I'd pay it. Put him in a rotation with Buehrle and Vazquez, and it would be the best 1-2-3 in the majors. Of course, Santana alone makes any 1-2-3 among the best in the majors.

DoItForDanPasqua
11-22-2007, 08:45 PM
I'd pay it. Put him in a rotation with Buehrle and Vazquez, and it would be the best 1-2-3 in the majors. Of course, Santana alone makes any 1-2-3 among the best in the majors.

I would be glad if the Sox got him only if they were actually going to expand the payroll by $25m. Otherwise you would have one player taking up about a quarter of the payroll and not a very solid team. Unless you are actually offering to pay it, in which case you are my hero.

guillen4life13
11-22-2007, 08:49 PM
I would be glad if the Sox got him only if they were actually going to expand the payroll by $25m. Otherwise you would have one player taking up about a quarter of the payroll and not a very solid team. Unless you are actually offering to pay it, in which case you are my hero.

One player who plays once every five games getting paid 1/4 of a team's total payroll?

That's laughable.

PaleHoseGeorge
11-22-2007, 08:50 PM
I think the era of the sub-$100 million payroll will soon become a thing of the past.

DoItForDanPasqua
11-22-2007, 08:51 PM
I think the era of the sub-$100 million payroll will soon become a thing of the past.

At least for teams that want to win more than 60 games a year.

PaleHoseGeorge
11-22-2007, 08:57 PM
At least for teams that want to win more than 60 games a year.

Good point.

I believe for several years Andrew Zimbalist and several other economists have advocated a minimum payroll requirement to address the competitive balance concerns surrounding baseball. Owners who won't compete for talent are the biggest threats to competitive balance, but they're all sitting on a gold mine once they sell. The minimum payroll requirement makes them spend to compete or get the hell out. Sounds good to me...
:cool:

soxfanreggie
11-22-2007, 09:09 PM
You may every once in a while have a team like the Marlins, full of young talent from years of high draft picks (and many compensation picks) and some decent young player development, but unless those teams shell out big $$$, those players will be gone to FA quick as can be.

I do agree with PHG, $100 million payrolls for most teams will become obsolete. Maybe, when I'm 50 or 60 (or even younger), I'll see the first billion dollar contract signed for a pro athlete. I can remember when a million a year was a heck of a lot, I was a young boy, but my eyes were wide with all those zeros.

As long as fans keep shelling out money and networks pay big $$$ for contracts, salaries will go up because the agents and players will want their share of it.

I should say though, it is likely it will be more than $1 million per win. Santana could possibly win more than 25 games, but that is unlikely, even for him. However, a team like the Yankees could give him a lot of run support. Imagine what MB could have done with his ERA this year on a team that hit for him. When Garland had 18 wins, wasn't his ERA in each of those seasons over 4? MB had an ERA much lower and had little run support.

Lip Man 1
11-22-2007, 09:58 PM
Reggie:

Well he is in his prime, hasn't been injured and is one of the top pitchers in the game over his career.

I'm sure the big market clubs in the East will be drooling over him should he hit the open market.

Lip

gregory18n
11-22-2007, 10:17 PM
Santana should be with the White Sox; the point has been made that $100 million is yeterday's payroll, that clubs' sales value proves it's too low; there is no reason the Sox shouldn't be considered a possible home for Santana. May as well, we need someone to replace Garland. Willis would be good too.

tstrike2000
11-22-2007, 10:29 PM
25+ million is sick money, but if any pitcher is worth 20 or more million, it's Santana. Someone will pay it, I just pray it's not the Cubs.

slavko
11-22-2007, 10:33 PM
25+ million is sick money, but if any pitcher is worth 20 or more million, it's Santana. Someone will pay it, I just pray it's not the Cubs.

and if they do, it's WC every year, just like it was with the Twins, right?

Dan Mega
11-22-2007, 10:36 PM
25+ million is sick money, but if any pitcher is worth 20 or more million, it's Santana. Someone will pay it, I just pray it's not the Cubs.

I'd take the Cubs signing him over anyone in the AL Central. Heck anyone in the AL for that matter. That would just lessen the chance of the Sox having to play against him.

santo=dorf
11-22-2007, 10:45 PM
It's all part of the "market correction" KW was talking about.

Oblong
11-22-2007, 10:50 PM
I'm leery of giving any pitcher a huge contract like that. I just see too much risk and the fact they only play every fifth day. In today's market I can see going 15-18, heck, just look at Torii's deal.

For 2007, the highest paid pitchers:

Bart Colon - $16
Andy Petitte - $16
Jason Schmidt - $15.7
Mike Hampton - $14.5
Pedro Martinez - $14
AJ Burnett - $13.2
Curt Schilling - $13
Roy Oswalt - $13
Johan Santana - $13
Roy Halladay $12.75
Javy Vazques - $12.5
Carlos Zambrano $12.5
Ben Sheets - $11.25
Mike Mussina $11

(Clemens wasn't listed in my source because it was probably based on opening day rosters)

Now obviously just because some of these contracts were stupid doesn't mean a Santana deal will be stupid but there's a couple of guys on here who were highly thought of at the time and even at almost half the price of Santana's alleged asking price are already deemed overpriced.

And this isn't to knock Santana because he's a Twin. I'll say the same thing in 3 years when Justin Verlander's a free agent and wants $20-$25 million, assuming the market keeps going up.

balke
11-22-2007, 11:08 PM
25+ million is sick money, but if any pitcher is worth 20 or more million, it's Santana. Someone will pay it, I just pray it's not the Cubs.


The Yanks set a bad standard with Clemens. This is definitely a result of that in my mind. The best pitcher in baseball gets the most money. If Clemens gets 25, Santana should get equal to or more.

ma-gaga
11-23-2007, 08:53 AM
If I was the Twins, I'd split the difference and do a 5 yr - $110mm deal.

It's too much, but at the same time, it's the "top pitcher" going rate, and the Twins kind of need a little morale boast right now.

jabrch
11-23-2007, 08:57 AM
If I was the Twins, I'd split the difference and do a 5 yr - $110mm deal.

It's too much, but at the same time, it's the "top pitcher" going rate, and the Twins kind of need a little morale boast right now.

Can they afford to do that and still keep a team around him?

palehozenychicty
11-23-2007, 09:10 AM
If I was the Twins, I'd split the difference and do a 5 yr - $110mm deal.

It's too much, but at the same time, it's the "top pitcher" going rate, and the Twins kind of need a little morale boast right now.


Indeed, it's a lot of money but I think the Twins need to send their fans a message that Minnesota is a good destination to play baseball and that they will compete for a world championship. It's pitiful that owners like Pohlad are too cheap to invest in their teams that have promising young talent.

ma-gaga
11-23-2007, 09:11 AM
Can they afford to do that and still keep a team around him?

They paid Hunter $13mm last year, they paid Santana $13mm last year. As long as they don't resign Silva, the rest of the pitching staff is young and cheap... I know there's raises to Mauer/Morneau/Cuddyer coming up, but I don't see it eating into an "ace" contract.

So, 'yes', but it also depends on who they sign/trade for as a centerfielder. The Twins don't have an in-house option.

jabrch
11-23-2007, 09:19 AM
They paid Hunter $13mm last year, they paid Santana $13mm last year. As long as they don't resign Silva, the rest of the pitching staff is young and cheap... I know there's raises to Mauer/Morneau/Cuddyer coming up, but I don't see it eating into an "ace" contract.

So, 'yes', but it also depends on who they sign/trade for as a centerfielder. The Twins don't have an in-house option.

Yeah, I was thinking about those raises to M/M/C.

I guess the question is does Santana want to be a Twin. Because if he is willing to take a Buehrle-like discount (at least 25% off of what he likely would have gotten?) then the Twins can probably find a way to do it, although even still that would be putting them at risk of being heavily tied to one contract. But if he wants, like Torii, to win, and make big money, there are a halfdozen teams out there (the usual suspects) that can spend the Twins into submission.

I don't see it happening. I can't see how he isn't in NY/Boston/California after this deal expires.

fquaye149
11-23-2007, 09:50 AM
Yeah, I was thinking about those raises to M/M/C.

I guess the question is does Santana want to be a Twin. Because if he is willing to take a Buehrle-like discount (at least 25% off of what he likely would have gotten?) then the Twins can probably find a way to do it, although even still that would be putting them at risk of being heavily tied to one contract. But if he wants, like Torii, to win, and make big money, there are a halfdozen teams out there (the usual suspects) that can spend the Twins into submission.

I don't see it happening. I can't see how he isn't in NY/Boston/California after this deal expires.

Medeski, Martin and Could?

GoSox2K3
11-23-2007, 11:00 AM
I'd take the Cubs signing him over anyone in the AL Central. Heck anyone in the AL for that matter. That would just lessen the chance of the Sox having to play against him.

The Sox play the Cubs almost as often during a season as AL East or AL West teams. Plus, I don't want any player on the Cubs that might help them win the pennant or WS. NYY, Bos, and LAA may be in the AL, but having them win the WS isn't going to destroy our market share and be shoved down our throats like the Cubs winning would.

captainclutch24
11-23-2007, 12:36 PM
He will go to Either the Yankees, Cubs, Red Sox, or Mets for that kind of money

jabrch
11-23-2007, 01:40 PM
Rotoworld says he is being offered 4/80 or 5/93. If he wants 5/126, and they are this far apart, he's gone.

Nellie_Fox
11-24-2007, 12:15 AM
St. Paul Pioneer Press writer Tom Powers has an interesting spin on Torii and the Santana situation. He says it marks an end to the Twins being able to keep players that they REALLY were set on keeping and had no replacement for. Read the article before you jump all over that statement; I think he makes a pretty good point.

Link (http://www.twincities.com/sports/ci_7536536?nclick_check=1)

Frater Perdurabo
11-24-2007, 07:48 AM
St. Paul Pioneer Press writer Tom Powers has an interesting spin on Torii and the Santana situation. He says it marks an end to the Twins being able to keep players that they REALLY were set on keeping and had no replacement for. Read the article before you jump all over that statement; I think he makes a pretty good point.

Link (http://www.twincities.com/sports/ci_7536536?nclick_check=1)

Well, I'd like to read it, but it requires registration and I'm too lazy. :tongue:

FarWestChicago
11-24-2007, 08:41 AM
Well, I'd like to read it, but it requires registration and I'm too lazy. :tongue:Then be smart (http://www.bugmenot.com/) about it. :cool:

Nellie_Fox
11-25-2007, 01:43 AM
Well, I'd like to read it, but it requires registration and I'm too lazy. :tongue:That's never happened on the Pioneer Press site before.

Go to www.twincities.com, point at "sports" and click on "Twins" in the drop-down menu. Then there will be a link to Powers' article titled "Departure of Twins' Torii Hunter signals a move in the wrong direction."

That should work. I'm not registered, and I had no trouble getting to the article again by just following the links from the home page.

Brian26
11-25-2007, 01:49 AM
Then be smart (http://www.bugmenot.com/) about it. :cool:

A couple of years ago, "Selig" for both the username and password worked for almost every major newspaper site. I'm not sure if that's still the case though.

Frater Perdurabo
11-25-2007, 07:44 AM
That's never happened on the Pioneer Press site before.

Go to www.twincities.com (http://www.twincities.com), point at "sports" and click on "Twins" in the drop-down menu. Then there will be a link to Powers' article titled "Departure of Twins' Torii Hunter signals a move in the wrong direction."

That should work. I'm not registered, and I had no trouble getting to the article again by just following the links from the home page.

Thank you. I actually read several articles. All were informative. As of right now, it looks like what's bad for the Twins could be good for the Sox.

ma-gaga
11-27-2007, 09:33 AM
St. Paul Pioneer Press writer Tom Powers has an interesting spin on Torii and the Santana situation. He says it marks an end to the Twins being able to keep players that they REALLY were set on keeping and had no replacement for. Read the article before you jump all over that statement; I think he makes a pretty good point.

Link (http://www.twincities.com/sports/ci_7536536?nclick_check=1)

I know this is couple of days old, and there are 4-5 new "Santana" threads, but this story really is the same old story with a slight twist. Basically, every freaking story that I've read online through the newspaper sites, or even most mainstream internet sites (ESPN, Yahoo!) recycle the same story. It might be right, but it's hard to listen to EVERY SINGLE TIME. "Twins can't afford their premier talent", blah blah blah.

This is hard to swallow over and over, so I went to the bloggers to see if someone put together a decent analysis on what happens now. And as usual, the Twins Geek put together a solid analysis. LINK (http://twinsgeek.blogspot.com/2007/11/sucking-joy-out-of-santana-trade.html) I think he's a member here. :cool:

And the Twins strategy? It sounds like they’re doing it:
Open negotiations and as part of those negotiations, get a counter-proposal. They desperately needed to have some idea of what Santana and his agent have in mind for money and what else he might be looking for.

This is what they've done. Now "everyone" knows, 5/126 is the high end for his deal. If MLB is "rolling in dough" like the rumors are, someone will sign him.

Shockingly the local sports-blab radio station put together a decent analysis on possible packages that the Twins might get for Johan. HERE. (http://www2.kfan.com/content/twins/story.aspx?content_id=23d42a15-3fa2-458d-9c1f-abb6fd3a27f5) Phil Mackey is an intern, or a production assistant, but this piece is solid.

So, Twins fans, instead of dwelling and complaining about how the Twins never step outside their financial comfort zone, appreciate the fact that Johan Santana’s current value could trigger a trade that would make the A.J. Pierzynski hijacking from 2003 look like a petty misdemeanor. Take a deep breath. Detach yourself from the human aspect, and understand that the Twins have a better chance to compete in 2007 and beyond if they trade Santana now, while his value is shooting up like a beanstalk.

When you start looking at the names, note that he doesn't claim the Twins will be asking for ALL of the players listed, but a package including at least ONE of those top prospects (Kemp, Ellsbury, Millidge, Hughes).

In my mind, you sign Johan and pay the price. I think you overpay for top shelf starting pitching. But that's looking exceedingly unlikely. So, if you trade him, I think you have to get back 2 top shelf prospects and 2 low level prospects that could develop. Noone wants to pay that price, Sons of Sam Horn, and NYY Fans are all coveting their prospects like this board did with Brian Anderson and Brandon McCarthy a couple of years ago. Using words like "untouchable" and "overpaid". But how many of you would trade for one year of Johan for those two players? And getting a chance at an exclusive window to extend him?? It's a no-brainer in my mind, it's just that it's been so long since NY and Boston had any impact rookies, that they cannot fathom that somehow these kids could flame out.

Tim Marchman from the NY Sun (not sure if this is a "real" newspaper or an internet only newspaper) has a nice article on this deal. (http://www.nysun.com/article/67008) Tim is a seamhead, and I usually agree with his views. But really, Santana is a sure thing 'best pitcher in baseball', and prospects are prospects. They may turn out, but in all likelihood will NOT.

It's unlikely that Hughes will do as much, given the reality that young pitchers just get hurt a lot and sometimes mysteriously fail to develop. To invoke another top prospect of a decade ago who suspiciously resembles a top Yankees prospect of today, it's unlikely that Chamberlain will have a career nearly as good as that of Kerry Wood, whom Montreal could not have had for Martinez.

---------------

The Hunter deal: I'm glad with the way the Twins handled the recent negotiations, they would have been foolish to give him more than a 4 year deal. It hurts losing Torii. He was the best offensive player last year, but it was a career year, and that contract would have been a killer for the Twins. The only thing that I'm disappointed with the Twins for, is that they aren't going to get anything more than a couple of draft picks for Hunter.

I'm disappointed with the way Hunter handled negotiations, he broke off talks and went to the team that offered the most money. He smiled, said all the right things about wanting to return, but when the Twins finally made him an offer, he didn't counter, he broke off negotiations, and stopped acting in good faith. He was a snake in the grass, but he smiled and said all the right things fooling the masses and even worse, the local media.

I'm most disappointed with the Local Media coverage of the Twins. It's terrible, it's horse****, it's full of inanity and fluff. Torii gives a good quote, and he had a good year, but to give him the highest contract in Twins history would be a mistake. You pay your elite "Hall of Fame" type players. Torii isn't in that category.

Anyways. That's all I got. Man, this post got long. Maybe I'll link to this post in each "Santana" thread to make myself feel smart.

:gulp:

SBSoxFan
11-27-2007, 09:53 AM
Tim Marchman from the NY Sun (not sure if this is a "real" newspaper or an internet only newspaper) has a nice article on this deal. (http://www.nysun.com/article/67008) Tim is a seamhead, and I usually agree with his views. But really, Santana is a sure thing 'best pitcher in baseball', and prospects are prospects. They may turn out, but in all likelihood will NOT.

Originally Posted by Marchman
It's unlikely that Hughes will do as much, given the reality that young pitchers just get hurt a lot and sometimes mysteriously fail to develop. To invoke another top prospect of a decade ago who suspiciously resembles a top Yankees prospect of today, it's unlikely that Chamberlain will have a career nearly as good as that of Kerry Wood, whom Montreal could not have had for Martinez.


:o: Just how far would Chamberlain have to fall to not "have a career nearly as good as ... Kerry Wood"? Is it even reasonable to suggest Kerry Wood is actually having a good career?

asindc
11-27-2007, 10:54 AM
Ma-gaga, very good post. I agree with your general assessment. I think a lot of fans, including some regular posters here, underestimate the value of the deal not done. I also think the LAAAAAAAAA will come to regret the Hunter signing.

As for Santana, the Twinkees are in a very good position, with at least 4 teams willing to take the 1-year risk (I happen to think LAAAAAA might also pick up the phone). Not that this will happen ("topic" in another thread), but even if the Twinkees wanted to talk to the Sox about a Santana trade, I really hope KW doesn't consider paying him 5/126. IMO, only the Yanks, Bos., and the Mets can absorb that, and not without huge risk.

Flight #24
11-27-2007, 10:58 AM
Ma-gaga, very good post. I agree with your general assessment. I think a lot of fans, including some regular posters here, underestimate the value of the deal not done. I also think the LAAAAAAAAA will come to regret the Hunter signing.

As for Santana, the Twinkees are in a very good position, with at least 4 teams willing to take the 1-year risk (I happen to think LAAAAAA might also pick up the phone). Not that this will happen ("topic" in another thread), but even if the Twinkees wanted to talk to the Sox about a Santana trade, I really hope KW doesn't consider paying him 5/126. IMO, only the Yanks, Bos., and the Mets can absorb that, and not without huge risk.

IMO there's no 1-year risk. He's almost certainly going to want an extension to approve the deal, and the teams involved can all easily afford to pay his rumored reuqest of 5/$126 and a lot more than that as well. So you'd trade for him knowing he's yours for the length of his new deal and that you basically have about the surest thing in baseball for that time.