fathom Posted August 17, 2007 Share Posted August 17, 2007 QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Aug 17, 2007 -> 04:46 PM) I was being very sarcastic. Santana good. But the answer to, "Oh, we're going to lose four to five games against him, oh!" is "don't lose." I don't look at Santana and say, "God, please, let him leave!11111111111" I say, Work him hard, get him out of the game and do damage against the pen. Figure out how to not get shutout by him every time you face him. I know Santana good, but our offensive approach against him doesn't help us out much, either. Yep, get Santana out of the game to face that terrible Twins bullpen. He's the only pitcher we face where our players seem mentally defeated before the game even begins. He's not going to stay with the Twins though, so it doesn't even really matter. He'll get a 6 year, 140 million dollar deal from someone. His fastball has already lost 2 mph this season, so that would be a terrible contract. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted August 17, 2007 Share Posted August 17, 2007 91.5M over 5 years (that's an average of 18.3/year), plus a 6th year option (unclear who holds the option, but performance is involved). Also a full NTC for the life of the contract. This is, by the way, the highest average salary for a multi-year pitcher deal... EVER. I think the Cubs overpaid again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted August 17, 2007 Share Posted August 17, 2007 QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Aug 17, 2007 -> 09:55 AM) I think the Cubs overpaid again. I think the Cubs overpaid as well...and I still think Zambrano gave them a discount. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregory Pratt Posted August 17, 2007 Share Posted August 17, 2007 QUOTE(fathom @ Aug 17, 2007 -> 11:50 AM) Yep, get Santana out of the game to face that terrible Twins bullpen. He's the only pitcher we face where our players seem mentally defeated before the game even begins. He's not going to stay with the Twins though, so it doesn't even really matter. He'll get a 6 year, 140 million dollar deal from someone. His fastball has already lost 2 mph this season, so that would be a terrible contract. Santana's lost a little heat but he will be effective, barring injury, for plenty of years. Speaking of his contract, I'm not so sure he's gone for good. So many good pitchers are staying, and clubs realize the value of guys like that. Not to mention that Santana is truly the face of the Minnesota Twins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammerhead johnson Posted August 17, 2007 Share Posted August 17, 2007 QUOTE(Markbilliards @ Aug 17, 2007 -> 04:09 PM) So if we judge them entirely by ERA I guess Zammy's better, but is he that much better which he deserved the contract he got? Mark does eat a ton more innings than Carlos does though because Carlos focuses on the strikeout so much more. Carlos Zambrano is on a completely different level than Mark Buehrle. Don't look at ERA, and never ever ever look at wins and losses. Seriously though, I thought you knew. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Chappas Posted August 17, 2007 Share Posted August 17, 2007 Off the top of my head, do the cubs have $70M a year tied to 4 guys a season for the next four years and $85M for 6 guys next season (Ramirez, Lee, Big Z, Lilly , Marquis and the Fonz)? Their pyroll has to be $120M next year. That team is a cash cow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted August 17, 2007 Share Posted August 17, 2007 QUOTE(Jenks Heat @ Aug 17, 2007 -> 01:17 PM) Off the top of my head, do the cubs have $70M a year tied to 4 guys a season for the next four years and $85M for 6 guys next season (Ramirez, Lee, Big Z, Lilly , Marquis and the Fonz)? Their pyroll has to be $120M next year. That team is a cash cow. I believe the term "cash cow" is in reference to how much money they bring in, not how much they spend. Cash hog might be a better animal reference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted August 17, 2007 Share Posted August 17, 2007 QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Aug 17, 2007 -> 12:09 PM) Santana's lost a little heat but he will be effective, barring injury, for plenty of years. Speaking of his contract, I'm not so sure he's gone for good. So many good pitchers are staying, and clubs realize the value of guys like that. Not to mention that Santana is truly the face of the Minnesota Twins. How much of a discount can he give him? It's been brought up in this thread that Zambrano gave the Cubs a discount, and he's still the highest paid starter with a multi-year contract in the history of the game. If Santana gives a discount to the Twins, he's earning $21 mill a year over 5 years; I really doubt either side wants to make that deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregory Pratt Posted August 17, 2007 Share Posted August 17, 2007 Minnesota's owner has deep pockets and they've got a ballpark coming. I am sure they'll find the money, and my guess is they're interested. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted August 17, 2007 Share Posted August 17, 2007 When has Carl Pohlad ever opened his checkbook? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted August 17, 2007 Share Posted August 17, 2007 Minaya will throw $150M at Johan and all will be right in the world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted August 17, 2007 Share Posted August 17, 2007 QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Aug 17, 2007 -> 01:36 PM) When has Carl Pohlad ever opened his checkbook? Apparently you forgot the Great 2006 Spending Spree featuring Tony Batista and Rondell White or the sequel that came a year later in the form of Ramon Oritz and Sidney Ponson. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted August 17, 2007 Share Posted August 17, 2007 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Aug 17, 2007 -> 12:36 PM) OF course, if you Judge solely based on ERA, without correcting for the fact that he's pitching in the NL, you're really missing a key factor. On average, a pitcher moving from the NL to the AL sees his ERA go up by just under a run, and the reverse holds true for going from the AL to the NL. Cite? Because average stats are much, much closer than that. In 2006, the AL era was 4.56, the NL era was 4.49. I want to see, at least, some multiple regressions before I believe that line. I think the AL-NL difference is exaggerated to the point of absurdity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregory Pratt Posted August 17, 2007 Share Posted August 17, 2007 The Twins have been fairly good about not letting the faces of their franchise leave. Like Kirby Puckett. It is not a given for Santana to leave via free agency. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted August 17, 2007 Share Posted August 17, 2007 QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Aug 17, 2007 -> 01:49 PM) Cite? Because average stats are much, much closer than that. In 2006, the AL era was 4.56, the NL era was 4.49. I want to see, at least, some multiple regressions before I believe that line. I think the AL-NL difference is exaggerated to the point of absurdity. Well, if the argument is that ERA's would be higher for the same pitcher in the AL than the NL, then comparing the current ERA's in each league isn't really a valid comparison. The point being made is that the competition on both sides of the ball in the AL is better (as evidenced by a truly dominant interleague record for the AL). Therefore, the best measures would be pitchers who actually changed leagues. See how their ERA's changed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greasywheels121 Posted August 17, 2007 Share Posted August 17, 2007 QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Aug 17, 2007 -> 02:51 PM) The Twins have been fairly good about not letting the faces of their franchise leave. Like Kirby Puckett. It is not a given for Santana to leave via free agency. Totally different. Those were also World Series caliber teams; these Twins teams--though good, are not that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted August 17, 2007 Share Posted August 17, 2007 QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Aug 17, 2007 -> 02:53 PM) Well, if the argument is that ERA's would be higher for the same pitcher in the AL than the NL, then comparing the current ERA's in each league isn't really a valid comparison. The point being made is that the competition on both sides of the ball in the AL is better (as evidenced by a truly dominant interleague record for the AL). Therefore, the best measures would be pitchers who actually changed leagues. See how their ERA's changed. Which is why I included the second paragraph. But I'd want to see a good analysis. There's no obvious reason that AL teams would spend more on pitchers (but o/w, the change should be on average equal to the average difference between the leagues). Consider that the Giants outbid everyone for Zito. Lol, but it does show that pitching is prized in the NL. I need to see some evidence that one sees almost a full run difference. That's f'n huge -- all I'm saying is, convince me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted August 17, 2007 Share Posted August 17, 2007 I thought the press conference was a tad much. It wasn't a free agent signing. Just Carlos re-upping. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted August 17, 2007 Share Posted August 17, 2007 QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Aug 17, 2007 -> 01:51 PM) The Twins have been fairly good about not letting the faces of their franchise leave. Like Kirby Puckett. It is not a given for Santana to leave via free agency. The most Puckett EVER made in a season was 7.2 mill. We are talking 3 times that amount for Johan Santana over the course of 5-6 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregory Pratt Posted August 17, 2007 Share Posted August 17, 2007 (edited) We are also talking about a vastly different economic culture. That money for them was big money for them, just like it is now, so it's not that off. Edited August 17, 2007 by Gregory Pratt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted August 17, 2007 Share Posted August 17, 2007 QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Aug 17, 2007 -> 02:39 PM) We are also talking about a vastly different economic culture. That money for them was big money for them, just like it is now, so it's not that off. And it's still $21 million Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregory Pratt Posted August 17, 2007 Share Posted August 17, 2007 It's still the face of the franchise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregory Pratt Posted August 17, 2007 Share Posted August 17, 2007 It's still mental masturbation, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxfest Posted August 17, 2007 Share Posted August 17, 2007 Dam hoped Scrubs would lose him! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted August 18, 2007 Share Posted August 18, 2007 QUOTE(Steff @ Aug 17, 2007 -> 08:04 AM) Somewhere near Mark's contract...? Not even close. Mark dropped trow and reached for his ankles with the Sox deal. He deserved more than he signed for. Mark would have gotten around Zambrano money on the open market with Zambrano getting a bit more (but he definitely signed for very close to market value on this deal or at least a boatload closer than Mark did). Plus as much as I love Mark...in terms of pitchers I'll take Z every day of the week over Buehrle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.