PDA

View Full Version : Swisher, Santana, and the Sox minor league system


kittle42
02-01-2008, 05:35 PM
BP just issued its rankings of the Top 100 prospects. Interesting list...after the Johan Santana trade, I felt like the A's may have gotten more for Nick Swisher than the Twins did for Santana. From the rankings, my feelings might have been right.

The Twins traded the best pitcher in baseball, in his prime, and didn't even get a top 50 prospect in return. Unbelievable. They barely did better than what you'd expect from free agent draft pick compensation.

The Sox managed one Top 100 prospect (Poreda, at 87) after trading away two guys ranked higher (de Los Santos at 46 and Gonzalez at 56).

oeo
02-01-2008, 05:39 PM
BP just issued its rankings of the Top 100 prospects. Interesting list...after the Johan Santana trade, I felt like the A's may have gotten more for Nick Swisher than the Twins did for Santana. From the rankings, my feelings might have been right.

The Twins traded the best pitcher in baseball, in his prime, and didn't even get a top 50 prospect in return. Unbelievable. They barely did better than what you'd expect from free agent draft pick compensation.

The Sox managed one Top 100 prospect (Poreda, at 87) after trading away two guys ranked higher (de Los Santos at 46 and Gonzalez at 56).

The difference being, the Twins had their hands tied with Santana, and Nick Swisher was not even available. Kenny did have to overpay.

We'll see in 5 years who has amounted to what, though.

balke
02-01-2008, 05:40 PM
BP just issued its rankings of the Top 100 prospects. Interesting list...after the Johan Santana trade, I felt like the A's may have gotten more for Nick Swisher than the Twins did for Santana. From the rankings, my feelings might have been right.

The Twins traded the best pitcher in baseball, in his prime, and didn't even get a top 50 prospect in return. Unbelievable. They barely did better than what you'd expect from free agent draft pick compensation.

The Sox managed one Top 100 prospect (Poreda, at 87) after trading away two guys ranked higher (de Los Santos at 46 and Gonzalez at 56).

1) Santana never in 100 million years would be traded to the Sox within the division.
2) Santana is going to make 25 million per on top of prospects traded, meaning the Twins had less bargaining power as only maybe 6 teams tops can afford something like that.
3) We'll see how good the prospects are when they play against the Sox. The Twins are about the best at evaluating talent that there is. What rankings the prospects have means little to nothing in this case. If they are good prospects, odds are they'll be great with the Twins.

The Thomenator
02-01-2008, 05:40 PM
As many have said before, Swisher cost so much because of his long cheap contract.

kittle42
02-01-2008, 05:42 PM
Just to be clear - I'm not meaning this is a KW rip-fest thread. It's more on the Twins than anything. Maybe it should be merged with the other Santana thread.

DumpJerry
02-01-2008, 05:47 PM
Read my sig.

batmanZoSo
02-01-2008, 05:56 PM
The difference being, the Twins had their hands tied with Santana, and Nick Swisher was not even available. Kenny did have to overpay.

We'll see in 5 years who has amounted to what, though.

All true, but I mean...why make the trade for Swisher if those are the circumstances? It's not smart business. Santana had to be traded, period, that's different. I didn't expect the Twins to make out like bandits nor should anyone have.

DSpivack
02-01-2008, 05:59 PM
All true, but I mean...why make the trade for Swisher if those are the circumstances? It's not smart business. Santana had to be traded, period, that's different. I didn't expect the Twins to make out like bandits nor should anyone have.

I don't know, it makes sense to me that you have to overpay for a pretty good hitter just about to enter his prime who is under contract for relatively cheap, as opposed to the best pitcher in the game who has to be signed to a completely new contract.

It's a gamble that Swisher will be worth more than Gio, DLS, Sweeney, etc. But I don't think it's necessarily a bad gamble to make.

munchman33
02-01-2008, 07:36 PM
Read my sig.


Gio Gonzalez will be on Oaklands 25 man roster, FWIW.

voodoochile
02-01-2008, 11:22 PM
The difference being, the Twins had their hands tied with Santana, and Nick Swisher was not even available. Kenny did have to overpay.

We'll see in 5 years who has amounted to what, though.

Exactly, 5 years of Swisher at $27M gross salary is worth WAY more than Santana who was going to be a FA next Fall any way you slice it...

jabrch
02-02-2008, 12:04 AM
Exactly, 5 years of Swisher at $27M gross salary is worth WAY more than Santana who was going to be a FA next Fall any way you slice it...

5 years of Swisher at $27mm or 7 years of Santana at $150mm


Well - the Mets sure got the bigger name - but I think we got the better deal.

chisox77
02-04-2008, 12:00 AM
Comparing what the A's got from the White Sox in the Nick Swisher deal to what the Twins got from the Mets in the Santana deal - wow - maybe just a bit too much analysis here?

I can understand the logic of this kind of discussion, but from the standpoint of a GM like KW, you have to make deals to address needs. When the trade was announced, I was pleasantly surprised that the Sox got Swisher, because his name never came up in any trade talks.

And by the way, read DumpJerry's sig. I agree with it.


:cool:

DumpJerry
02-04-2008, 12:07 AM
And by the way, read DumpJerry's sig. I agree with it.


:cool:

You may proceed to Go and collect $200.00

Gio Gonzalez will be on Oaklands 25 man roster, FWIW.
That's an easy one, assuming you're right (last time I checked, the A's have not yet broken camp and moved north for the season). They have unloaded everyone on that team over the past two years. Their 25 man roster has more room on it than an empty ballroom.

Teams which are contending for playoff spots do not have that much flexibility on their 25 man rosters. They have quality players.

Will he get ROY, MVP or Cy Young in 2008? Not likely.

munchman33
02-04-2008, 01:22 AM
You may proceed to Go and collect $200.00


That's an easy one, assuming you're right (last time I checked, the A's have not yet broken camp and moved north for the season). They have unloaded everyone on that team over the past two years. Their 25 man roster has more room on it than an empty ballroom.

Teams which are contending for playoff spots do not have that much flexibility on their 25 man rosters. They have quality players.

Will he get ROY, MVP or Cy Young in 2008? Not likely.

Hey, I'm just saying. They're intending for him to have a job in the starting five because they feel he's ready. I don't personally think he'll win ROY, but it isn't out of the realm of possibility.

munchman33
02-04-2008, 01:23 AM
Comparing what the A's got from the White Sox in the Nick Swisher deal to what the Twins got from the Mets in the Santana deal - wow - maybe just a bit too much analysis here?

I can understand the logic of this kind of discussion, but from the standpoint of a GM like KW, you have to make deals to address needs. When the trade was announced, I was pleasantly surprised that the Sox got Swisher, because his name never came up in any trade talks.

And by the way, read DumpJerry's sig. I agree with it.


:cool:

Our biggest need is for a SP. I would contend that it was before the Swisher trade as well.

DumpJerry
02-04-2008, 02:05 AM
Hey, I'm just saying. They're intending for him to have a job in the starting five because they feel he's ready. I don't personally think he'll win ROY, but it isn't out of the realm of possibility.
He's ready for the A's to have him on their 25 man roster. That does not mean he is automatic for any team's 25 man roster. He was a longshot, at best, to be on the Sox' 25 man roster in 2008, barring injury to Buehrle or Danks. Who would he outperform right now on the Sox? He has zero big league experience.

Right now with him maybe making the A's 25 man roster does not mean Kenny blew it. If Kenny had traded Gio to the Red Sox for Coco Crisp, for example, Gio would be in Pawtucket, at best. Also, how do you know they will put him on the 25 man roster this year out of camp?

It's just that the A's have torn down their team and are starting to build it up from the ground. This means that guys who would normally be AAA somewhere get a chance to be on the 25 man roster.

munchman33
02-04-2008, 03:06 AM
He's ready for the A's to have him on their 25 man roster. That does not mean he is automatic for any team's 25 man roster. He was a longshot, at best, to be on the Sox' 25 man roster in 2008, barring injury to Buehrle or Danks. Who would he outperform right now on the Sox? He has zero big league experience.

Right now with him maybe making the A's 25 man roster does not mean Kenny blew it. If Kenny had traded Gio to the Red Sox for Coco Crisp, for example, Gio would be in Pawtucket, at best. Also, how do you know they will put him on the 25 man roster this year out of camp?

It's just that the A's have torn down their team and are starting to build it up from the ground. This means that guys who would normally be AAA somewhere get a chance to be on the 25 man roster.

I thought Gio had a pretty good chance at beating Gavin in spring for a rotation spot. But that's probably more an indictment of Gavin.

Tragg
02-04-2008, 09:52 AM
The difference being, the Twins had their hands tied with Santana, and Nick Swisher was not even available. Kenny did have to overpay.
I don't think comparison to Santana is a great comparison - Cabrera would be better (of course, Swisher should come cheaper than Cabrera)
You really think that's what happened - that Williams called Beane out of the blue and asked what it would take to get Nick Swisher?

I would think the opposite - Beane wants young prospects and asks himself where he can get them. That could work the opposite - Williams asks who will trade their players, and immediately points to Oakland.
Second, Swisher doesn't directly fill a need - our big need was CF and leadoff; he can be squeezed into either but isn't a great fit for either. So I doubt if we were targeting someone, it would have been him. Not that we can't use him, obviously; but we still have centerfield and leadoff issues.

fquaye149
02-04-2008, 11:38 AM
BP just issued its rankings of the Top 100 prospects. Interesting list...after the Johan Santana trade, I felt like the A's may have gotten more for Nick Swisher than the Twins did for Santana. From the rankings, my feelings might have been right.

The Twins traded the best pitcher in baseball, in his prime, and didn't even get a top 50 prospect in return. Unbelievable. They barely did better than what you'd expect from free agent draft pick compensation.

The Sox managed one Top 100 prospect (Poreda, at 87) after trading away two guys ranked higher (de Los Santos at 46 and Gonzalez at 56).

1 year of Santana vs....what? 4 years of swisher?

It's not a fair comparison to make, especially when you consider the other factors (like Santana demanding a trade)

fquaye149
02-04-2008, 11:40 AM
Gio Gonzalez will be on Oaklands 25 man roster, FWIW.

Which is about 4 months earlier than he'd be on the 25 man here

voodoochile
02-04-2008, 11:56 AM
1 year of Santana vs....what? 4 years of swisher?

It's not a fair comparison to make, especially when you consider the other factors (like Santana demanding a trade)

And the fact that the Twins were not going to be able to afford to re-sign him next fall even if they didn't trade him.

wulfy
02-04-2008, 02:28 PM
I thought Gio had a pretty good chance at beating Gavin in spring for a rotation spot. But that's probably more an indictment of Gavin.

That would be 3 lefties in your rotation ... have the Sox ever had 3 lefties in the rotation?

rdivaldi
02-04-2008, 02:40 PM
That would be 3 lefties in your rotation ... have the Sox ever had 3 lefties in the rotation?

Wasn't there a short period in time in 2000 when the Sox had Sirotka, Parque and Buehrle all at the same time?

Lip Man 1
02-04-2008, 05:01 PM
Buehrle was more of a bullpen guy in 2000 but he did make some occasional starts so technically your comment about three left handers in the rotation is correct.

Lip

munchman33
02-04-2008, 05:07 PM
That would be 3 lefties in your rotation ... have the Sox ever had 3 lefties in the rotation?

If that's your best option then who cares? :dunno:

gogosox16
02-04-2008, 05:08 PM
If that's your best option then who cares? :dunno:
seriously, if my best 5 were all lefties then by all means, they are all in the rotation to help us compete.

DumpJerry
02-04-2008, 05:11 PM
If that's your best option then who cares? :dunno:
The same people who care about your opinion(s). Play nice.

fquaye149
02-04-2008, 08:08 PM
The same people who care about your opinion(s). Play nice.

I don't understand this post:?:

munchman33
02-04-2008, 08:24 PM
I don't understand this post:?:

People don't like me.

fquaye149
02-04-2008, 08:31 PM
People don't like me.

I don't like you either:D: but I have a feeling Dump misread your post...

FarWestChicago
02-04-2008, 08:39 PM
People don't like me.Shoelessshaun likes you. :happyguy:

voodoochile
02-04-2008, 10:21 PM
Shoelessshaun likes you. :happyguy:

I think his point stands...