Subscibe to this blog!

Saturday, November 24, 2007

Is the price right for Santana?

Wanting Santana in blue? Well that could be had this off season with a package similar to the one needed for Cabrera and probably a 7 year $140 million+ contract! With that said, I want to analyze the pros and cons of the Dodgers acquiring Santana.

The Pros:
-It's obvious that Santana is the BEST pitcher in baseball. Even in a off year last year, he was tops in the league in every single pitching category. Santana would bolster the rotation of any team
-He's extremely durable. In the past 4 years, he's averaging 33.5 games a year and 228 innings per year.
-With Santana, the Dodgers will have an amazing rotation of Santana, Penny, Lowe, Billingsley, Schmidt. If Schmidt can post up an era of around 4.2 after his surgery, then the Dodgers could have one of the best rotations in the Majors, with at least 3 aces in Santana, Penny and Lowe
-A pitcher of his caliber probably would not become available in the free agent of trade department for a long time
-He's only 28; he still has many prime years left as a pitcher
-Considering what the Giants payed Zito, signing Santana at $20 million per seems like a bargain

The Cons:
-He would cost at least two of the following-Kemp, LaRoach, Kershaw, Loney and LaRoach- and a few of these lesser upside prospects: Ethier, Hu, Abreu, MacDonald. The cost of prospects in huge and could leave the Dodgers holes in positions that would have to be fixed through the free agent market later on.
-He is seeking at least a contract in the $140 million range. That amount of money spent on one player takes up a significant part of a team's payroll (even though I do believe that Santana is worth the money)
-He's a pitcher and there is a relatively negative track record for pitchers who received large contracts (Darren Dreifort, Kevin Brown, Mike Hampton, Chan Ho Park etc)
-If a receives one single arm injury, it could have a significant negative impact on the rest of his career.

Personally, I see adding Santana as a HUGE addition to the Dodgers, yet I do not think they should do it. Instead I think the Dodgers should simply stick with the kids. Kershaw, if he stays healthy, has the potential to be like Santana. Furthermore, if Elbert can rebound from his surgery, then the Dodgers future with pitchers looks great with these two lefties. If those two can progress and possibility be in the rotation by 2009, then the Dodgers have no need to look and pay for pitching through external sources. Furthermore, I am extremely skeptical of the notion of signing pitchers to long contracts. The risk factor involved is simply too great especially with the Dodgers (all the long contracts they gave out in recent years have been complete debacles)

If the Dodgers feel like the need to make a move, then I feel that they should attempt to trade for Erik Bedard, Scott Kazmir and Miguel Cabrera. All three have service time avabilable before they hit free agency but they would cost an arm and a leg in prospects. Ultimately, I feel that the Dodgers best bet is to stick with the youth movement. I feel that the club will be significantly improved just with the kids!

1 comment:

jchiao said...

hmm, i don't think it's worth trading the entire future. if the price goes down, then sure.

besides, you never know what will happen. take mike hampton, for example. he signed a $120 million dollar contract, got a series of injuries (i mean, he got injured before pitching an inning in winter ball!), and is now basically paid to do nothing!

by the way, you repeated laroach twice! haha ! loser (: