The Boston Red Sox are on the verge of trading young talent for the best left-handed pitcher in Major League Baseball.
The Sox could probably finish a deal for Johan Santana today if they'd include Jacoby Ellsbury in a package with Jon Lester and two mid- to high-level minor league prospects (shortstop Jed Lowrie and pitcher Justin Masterson).
Theo Epstein and Co. have so far resisted the inclusion of both Lester and Ellsbury, reportedly putting two separate packages on the table with one of the two players in each.
But why wouldn't the Red Sox include Lester? After all, they'd be replacing a strong pitching prospect with a two-time Cy Young winner.
The Sox have also offered Coco Crisp in lieu of Ellsbury. Crisp is one of the best defensive outfielders in the AL, and should have won a Gold Glove in 2007. His career offensive numbers show an average hitter with above-average speed on the basepaths.
Considering that the Red Sox have won two of the last four World Series on the strength of their starting rotation, pitching should continue to be their priority. In 2004, the Sox started the same five pitchers throughout the season, and in 2007 had the second best ERA in baseball behind San Diego.
With the inclusion of Ellsbury, the Red Sox could probably eliminate Masterson from the trade, thus keeping one of their top pitching prospects, along with their best overall prospect in Clay Bucholz.
To his credit, Ellsbury looked great in 2007. His speed is of the once-in-a-generation type, and he's a homegrown talent. But it's considerably easier to acquire an outfielder than it is to acquire a premier starter.
So go ahead Theo—bite the bullet.
A Santana deal would put the Tigers, Angels, and Yankees on notice that there will be no easy series against the Red Sox in 2008—not with Santana, Beckett, Schilling, Matsuzaka, Wakefield, and Bucholz taking turns on the mound.
comments (25) write a comment »
write a new comment
9 months ago
If nobody else is offering a better package, then why throw in Ellsbury? At this point, the Sox are bidding against themselves. If the Twins don't want to trade Santana, then just throw money at him next off season and keep your prospects.
Now, if the Yankees up their offer and include Ian Kennedy and Phillip Hughes, then maybe you consider upping your offer. But until then, no need to rush to make a deal....
from 9 months ago
I realize that they don't need to up the ante yet but they may have to in the end to finish the deal, if the package on the table was enough the deal would have happened by now. I think both the RS and Twins are biding their time, the Twins hoping the NYY, NYM or other team will come in with a better deal and the RS don't have to be in a rush but I have a feeling (and I could be wrong) that the RS have worked the deal to the point where they have a first refusal. That would mean Ellsbury/Lester in the same deal, and as I said they could finish it today by going there. I agree though there is no need to do that unless the RS are in a hurry.
from 9 months ago
Sean gives sound advice. The "Twinkies" are bottom feeders. They won't pay their own talent and continue to exist by trading their home grown talent for other teams young prospects. The Twins should not be rewarded for business practices that are detrimental to baseball. Bid for the player's services when he reaches free agency. Don't reward an organization that will not pay its own players!
John
from 9 months ago
Theo , It would definetly not makes sense to to give up Ellsbury!!! He will be good for Boston for a long time to come and he doesnt want to leave!!! I believe it woud be a serious mistake. If that happens I will definetly be greatly disappointed in the Red Sox and not watch again. Carolyn
from 9 months ago
Why not to trade Ellsbury
1. Trading Ellsbury would be second only to getting rid of Babe Ruth which started the "curse".
2. Johnny Pesky said on sports talk radio that Ellsbury will be another Ted Williams.
3. Without Ellsbury the last WS would not have been as easy.
9 months ago
Sean is right. This is no reason for the Sox to make a better offer. In addition, if the Yankees add Kennedy and Hughes, let them have Santana. With Santana the Sox will still the favorite and they will have chips to move. If the Sox do not get Santana, then they can trade Crisp and prospect to Texas for Saltalamacchia, peferable, or Laird so that they have a true catcher of the future.
The sox are in great position and have the luxury of not needing to make any moves, so why force it?
9 months ago
I am more convinced than ever that the Red Sox were never this (the Santana Sweepstakes) to win it.
Though they won the World Series, I don't believe they are completely confortable with their payroll being at the level it is currently at, and I don't believe they have much interest in adding another $20 million a year for seven years to it for one player, even if they do rid themselves of Crisp's contract.
If Boston was serious about Santana, I believe he'd have been there long ago.
Giving up all the talent required to get a Santana in trade and then having to treat him as if he is a free agent immediately after giving up all those players is a very tough pill to swallow.
Quite frankly, I think there is only one team in baseball that is ready (and possibly capable) of swallowing that pill, and we all know who it is.
The Red Sox are in this to keep the Yankees honest, if not drive up the price.
Everything that hits the press - certainly out of Minnesota - appears to be designed with the intent of drawing a reaction from the Yankees.
I believe Bill Smith thinks that Hughes, Cabrera, and one or two second-tier prospects offer will be there for the Twins anytime they want it, and for his sake, he better be right.
From the very beginning, there has only been one spot for Santana to land, and I think the Twins, Red Sox, and Yankees all realize it.
Johan Santana will end up in New York, it's just a matter of when and how much.
9 months ago
I cannot wait until he shows up in Seattle.
Wait, that will never happen :( .
9 months ago
Santana????
Are you nuts?
Look what has to be given up for someone whos numbers are dropping!
Some other sports writing genius "predicted" that Lester will be 10 for 10 in 2008. So, if that's true and Santana manages to win 20 games - very unlikely - what did we gain? 10 games? For how much money? And what did we give up for 10 games? Two prospects, that if the Red Sox scout's track record for selecting talent holds up - and there is no reason to think otherwise - we have a future shortstop and lefty that is young and not near his prime. A good lefty pitcher who is on his way to becoming a great lefty pitcher. Remember game 4 of the World Series. And, a center fielder who if he keeps up the way he started is a future All Star for the next ten years. (116 at bats in the regular season for .338 and post season .438 in the World Series) Hello??????
Keep what you have and what you know and don't speculate on what might be.
That's what they did with Eric Gagne and how did that work out for the Red Sox, Theo?
from 9 months ago
3 questions:
What makes you think that Lester will be great? He could be but Santana is already there. I really don't care f the RS stand pat because if Bucholz and Lester continue to develop they may be better off 2-3 seasons down the road. I guess I've always been a bit of a let's win now.
Since when isn't 10 more wins in a season a big deal? If the RS had 10 less in '07 they don't make the postseason. If the RS win 1o more next season they'll win 106 games, that's a big difference.
Why worry about the $$$? I never worry about how much the RS spend that's their job. The tickets are expensive but even if they cut payroll or just stay the same ticket prices are not coming down until the supply catches up with the demand. That will be when the RS are not as competitive, so I hope they never come down.
I love Ellsbury and knew I'd catch heat for writing what I did. It's too bad my post got edited the way it did because there was more info in there that I thought was important. The kid is projected to be a good ML player but those projections can of course be wrong. Crisp doesn't exactly hurt you out in CF (I know some disagree) and his career offensive numbers are average. The likelihood that Ellsbury will be better defensively is slim. Offensively he has that blazing speed, and lead-off hitter capability.
The biggest point I was trying to make was if Ellsbury is leaving and Santana is coming then the additional loss of Lester is not that big. Of course he could be used in other trades if the RS still have him.
Thanks for the feedback , good luck.
9 months ago
I have watched baseball for close to 60 years, I don't remember the Red Sox having and Ellsbury type player. He makes all our pitchers better, both in the field and at the plate and he plays every day. Sorry I don't make the trade. Ever hear of arm problems. Does anyone remember Jeff Bagwell he went away for a pitcher we only used during the playoffs. If we get Santana without Ellsbury do the trade.
from 9 months ago
Yeah I've heard of arm problems. Evere hear of an outfileder blowing out a knee, or an achilles? I don't thik you play in fear of injury any players career could end on the next pitch. That's the logic I always use when fans (mostly NYY fans) talk about how ARod is going to break the HR record someday. The guy is about 250 HR away, that's a lot of HR's and as I said anything can happen. Griffey would have been approaching the record if he had not had a long series of injuries.
The Bagwell for Larry Anderson trade was not a good trade but part of that is that the RS lost Anderson because the owners were found guilty of collusion by an arbitrator and al the players (free agents) signed during the previous off season were declared free agents once again. So the RS got Anderson for a couple months for a borderline HOF type 1Bman. Oh well, they also got Varitek and Lowe for Heathcliff Slocum.
9 months ago
Santana would be great but not for the cost of Lester, and Ellsbury. As a matter of fact do not trade Ellsbury.
9 months ago
The Red Sox do not need Johan Santana. Neither do the Yankees. A trade with Minnesota by either team would be foolish. It would ultimately make the team that trades for him weaker. The only reason each team has an offer out on the table is to offset the other.
Santana may still end up with one of these teams, but to what end that will serve is unknown.
I agree with Heywood (hardly an original pseudonym, by the way - that one's been around since the mid-80's). The best trades sometimes are the ones you DON'T make.....
9 months ago
Ellsbury, in addition, brings poise, and an electricity that's been lacking for some time. Good outfielders may be plentiful, but those sparks aren't. Don't trade him. Period.
9 months ago
One more thought: look at the Sox' record when Tek has been out - it's beyond bad, into "gruesome". Time to think ahead. I agree with Nico. Saltalamacchia!!
9 months ago
These comments that equate Santana to some mediocre broken down pitcher or even Larry Anderson are laughable. Santana is a top 5 pitcher in all of baseball. Name me three other lefties who are better than Santana? I bet you can't. Lester is not one of them either. Anyone who has been following Lester should know the truth about him - nice kid, very competitive, young lefty, slightly above average stuff, fast ball average - 92-93, tends to be wild. Lester is a nice story he is a 3-4-5 guy. They are a dime a dozen. Santana is a clear #1 starter. There are not more than 10 - 15 of them in all of baseball. Ellsbury? Nice kid, great speed, very littly power, average defense, hits well and is improving his on base percentage. he's a Johhny Damon wannabe. A very good player, but not a hall of famer type. If the sox can get Santana for these two guys and a few marginal prospects, they should do it in a heart beat. Having a rotation of Santana, Matzusaka and Beckett will allow them to compete against the Yankees and their $250 million payroll for years.
9 months ago
It's my sense that the Red Sox ARE truly interested in Santana (Santa?), but they do not want to overpay. Their position is one of strength. If this strategy causes them to lose out, so be it. It may turn out to be wrong, but it's the RESPONSIBLE thing to do. Human beings (parents, judges..) can only act responsibly and HOPE to have done right. The Red Sox Brain Trust is as good as it gets.
Acquiring Santana (oh, how close I come to spelling it "SANTA") will enable more rest and effective use of Dice-K and Schill while providing a huge margin of error should injury befall any front line pitchers. Thus, it's not only what Santana can or will produce, but the positive impact his presence will likely have on the longevity and quality of the whole pitching staff-a huge monetary and team investment.
Although Crisp is a premier defensive outfielder, Ellsbury's upside appears sooo much bigger. I'd try to keep him. We do NEED a catcher of the future.
If we can get Santana, get him....IF his urine and other medical issues check out.
Steve B.
Formerly of Framingham, MA.
Now on the Florida West Coast
from 9 months ago
I grew up on Beaver Street (the projects) in Framingham. I moved to Natick for high school.
I agree that the RS are doing a nice job of holding the line on how much they'll give up to acquire Santana. I would like to see it happen but I also wouldn't mind watching the players they have mature into veterans. I just want to wach them win more championships, as far as I'm concerned after waiting until I was 49 it'll never get old.
9 months ago
While I agree in theory that the addition of Santana would cement a certainty that Boston would have arguably the strongest pitching staff in the Majors but consider where the team with last years MLB top staff, San Diego, ended up?
I think that the only player that Theo should not include (and probably the only one who needs to be there to seal it) is Ellsbury. From what we saw this year he would be an exciting and productive member of the Sox that I quite frankly look forward to seeing on an every day basis.
While the argument is certainly there that Santana would give us a few more good years I feel that to be able to see what this young player can bring each day will be a treat for Red Sox Nation for many years to come.
If the SOX had a pitching staff that needed a major overhaul with no established starters it would be a reason to give up on this young talent, but since their not, I think that ultimately not trading Ellsbury will be the smartest move.
I've been a RED SOX fan for every one of the last 48 years (my first game was Ted Williams last) and I can't think of another player that I have looked forward more to see playing because of the thrill he will give us throughout the entire season. Think of it, going home from SECOND on a while pitch? Come on! How many grounders to short will be singles instead of outs and how about the SOX having a player that LEADS THE LEAGUE in Stolen bases? He could do it.
No, don't trade him! Let the Becketts, Dice K's, Buckholz's et al be our backbone and let us enjoy the thrills that ths young player probably will give us for many years.
9 months ago
CEMENT a CERTAINTY that Boston would have ARGUABLY the strongest pitching staff???
Pick one.
9 months ago
Signing Santana to what would amount to a long term deal is at best....suicide!
Think about it. He's one very good pitcher who could go sour in one or two seasons. A 7 - 10 year deal would be great for Santana, but what if he burns out before then? Would the Red Sox then be stuck with another Manny? Remember 2 years ago when Manny wanted to leave but no one was interested in picking up his contract, as pricy as it was? As a result, Manny stayed! This would be another same case senario. Due you really think anyone will be interested in A-Rod in a few years if he washes up? (Of course, he's with the Yankees, so who cares!!!)
To give up Lester, Ellsbury, Coco, Bucholz, whoever, is what it would probably take. Do we need to do this? The Sox just won the World Series with who they got on the bench now, including all of the above. Lester & Bucholz....young, proven & still promising. Ellbury....he can hit, certainly run & is learning the field. He has many years ahead while others like Manny & Big Papi could retire in the near future. They will need Ellsbury's bat, glove & legs at that time. Coco has a great glove & leg speed but hit bat has got holes in it. He needs some help with that then he'll be whole again.
If the Sox are the only team with any interest in Santana right now, it plays to their advantage. Don't be in such a rush to sign him & give up certain players that may be needed in the near future. Also, keep in mind, with the Sox being the reigning World Series Champs, they will have to pay a large price & give a long term contract to a new "ball boy" to join the Red Sox.
The Sox did OK in 2007, I expect them to be serious contenders again in 2008 pretty much just the way they are now. Let's see how spring training goes too.
Eddie L.
Beverly, Ma.
9 months ago
Theo, if you like your job in Boston then I say don't make this deal with Ellsbury included because He just may be the next great franchise player in Red Sox history!!! Remember Dave Roberts great running ability, well its all wrapped up in Jacoby, so as Howie says, DEAL or NO DEAL??? The answer should be NO DEAL!!!
D. Aldrich
Norridgewock, ME
9 months ago
No Brainer - DO NOT TRADE ELLSBURY !!!!! Santana has stats that parallel Pedro at the same point in his career, and they let Pedro go. Boston blew it with the big money contracts in the past (Manny-made him un-marketable, Drew & Crisp - too much for what they got in return, Gagne - a TOTAL BUST). They need to keep an eye on the long term. Keep the Pedroia/Youklis/Ellsbury/Lowell type of guys signed and happy. Think along the lines of the Patriots way of thinking. Bring in veteran talent, hungry for a championship for below market prices. New England's success speaks for itself. Get a prima donna ONLY for the Macy's bargain basement price. Load up the contract with incentives, then let the guy go out there and earn the extra bucks.
9 months ago
Crisp was not expensive in the least. Manny was unmarketable because teqams tried to get him for 50 cents on the dollar because they thought the RS were desperate, especially since Manny put it out there he wanted to leave. The 18-20 millions he's made a year now doesn't look so bad. The few years after Manny signed the free agent market changed and players weren't getting the mega contracts but they sure are now. They would have signed Pedro but not for the 4 years (the RS offer was 3 years) and that ends up being a good move. Gagne goes without saying but when they made the trade it looked good, Gagne just didn't perform. MLB is a far different sport/business than NFL, guaranted contracts, no salary cap (luxury tax appraoches but not even close), usually more years of production for the bigger stars, longer careers, and seasons. Thanks for the feedback.
write a new comment