Friday, November 09, 2007

Question for Everyone....

Does anyone know the specifics of Johan's no-trade clause?

I think I know this:
1. He had one from last year for his final position in the Cy Young race.
2. He didn't get one this year from his final position in the Cy Young race.

But does anyone know how long the no-trade clause from last year lasts? Does it extend through the end of his contract? Until the trade deadline? Until Opening Day? Until the first of the year?

For those people who think trading Santana is something that probably should be done, this isn't a small issue. If Johan gets to pick what team the Twins can trade with (ala Griffey) the Twins leverage in a trade could be significantly different than it is if they can take the best offer. If the no-trade clause lasts until Opening Day, trading him during the season might give them a lot more leverage than they would have this offseason.

Thanks for any info anyone can provide.
John

8 comments:

ubelmann said...

Cot's contracts has Johan listed as:

# limited no-trade clause 2006-08

* may block trades to 3 clubs in 05, 8 in 06, 10 in 07 & 12 in 08

* full no-trade clause for 2007-08 with top 3 in CY vote in 06 or 07


They're usually pretty accurate, so I'd say it's pretty reasonable to assume that Johan has a full no-trade clause right now.

This article from La Velle a little while back also seems to allude to a full no-trade clause, but makes it seem like Santana would be willing to waive it in exchange for a buyout or a trade to the right team.

Personally, I don't think the Twins can stomach the idea of a rotation without a veteran leader next year, so Santana will stick around regardless of whether or not the Twins can extend or re-sign him.

SL__72 said...

On mlbtraderumors.com it mentioned the first part but not the 2nd but in this Joe Christensen article he says "It's complicated because Santana has a complete no-trade clause" so what Cot's says must be right.

I agree they probably won't trade him and most of the noise coming out of the GM meetings makes it sound like that is the case, but at least one GM thinks we will trade him:

"I think Santana will be moved for sure," Phillies GM Pat Gillick said earlier in the day.

Story.

SoCaltTwinsfan said...

Aaron Gleeman referenced an article by ESPN.com's Jerry Crasnick in which he surveyed 15 "insiders" and 14 of them said that they felt Johan would stay with the Twins.

There's no way the Twins don't re-sign Torii and trade Johan in the same offseason after getting a new ballpark started. The public backlash would be horrific.

Anonymous said...

SoCal, I'd love to accept your reasoning, but so far what I see is exactly what I expected from the Twins--they won't sign Hunter, Silva, nor Nathan, nor Santana, nor will they have the guts to trade any of them. Period.

Nothing will change with the new park. Nothing. I hate to be such a pessimist, but the Pohlads are going to fatten their yearly profit, kick in a marginal amount to increase payroll, not even enough to keep up with baseball inflation, and this is it.

You see a franchise do things over and over again and you begin to understand it is NOT an aberration. Low ball ridiculous insulting offers to their own free agents, irrespective of their true value--Hunter, Silva, and did they really think Johan would take 2 years at 18 MM per plus an option? Come on people. Do you really believe anyone, ANYONE in the Twins front office would even think about a 5 year 100 MM dollar deal for Santana? I imagine they would all vomit up their lunch to even contemplate such a contract.

All well and good, but what gets me is their inability and unwillingness to make deals involving these guys. Yes, you can argue Hunter and Silva were necessary to the playoff chase last year, even when things looked pretty dim, and the offers weren't there....ok...but then why dump Castillo in what was an obvious salary matter?

I've said it before and I will repeat it ad infinitum...the Twins are about MONEY. Period, end of statement. No decisions about baseball can be made without considering and ultimately bending to THE BOTTOM LINE. MONEY!!!!!! Not that this makes them different than a whole lot of clubs, but what will lead this franchise back to mediocrity is timidity--if you don't have the money to make mistakes, then you have to gamble. Make some deals. Accept less than "market value" in trades and continue to work the farm system. I can live with that, though I'd prefer that they spend the money....the test will be what they do with Santana. My bet is he plays out the season, gets a ridiculous low ball offer and we get two compensatory draft picks. I pray I"m wrong.

Anonymous said...

f you don't have the money to make mistakes, then you have to gamble. Make some deals. Accept less than "market value" in trades and continue to work the farm system.

That sounds more like a plan for continuous mediocrity to me. The way you win championships is finding championship quality players and hanging onto them as long as you can. Not trading them away for less than "market value".

And yes, baseball is a business. So its about money. And Minnesotans don't spend as much money on their baseball team as a number of other places. So the team has less money to work with.

Anonymous said...

comment to the above poster: If you really believe that the Pohlads with the new stadium will be receiving less money than most of the MLB teams, you're just dead wrong. The new revenue should leave them in the upper half, if not a little bit higher, which would dictate at least a 90-100 MM payroll in today's dollars. Plus, Pohlad stands to gain 400 MM the first day the stadium opens (less his "contribution", which I'll wager is leveraged in some interesting way) by the increase in the franchise value. Sing me another song about how Minnesotans don't spend enough money---you've listened to owners farrrrr too long. Watch the ticket prices in the new stadium and tell me that nonsense.

Further, is it better to hold on to Santana, et al and get compensatory draft picks that will take three or four or five years to reach the MLB team IF they do, or is it less of a "gamble" to make a few trades even if it is perceived you don't get "market" value for the player....there is no way the Twins are going to get Santana's "true" value in VORP or whatever metric you prefer, given his no trade clause, etc, but the organization put itself in this position...get SOMETHING. You want a continued blueprint for mediocrity--allow free agents to leave your ballclub and get NOTHING in return for them. In a few selected cases, it may be prudent, but most of the time, get something back if you can. It is certainly true none of us know exactly what can or will be offered for Santana. But if they let him walk for zilch of a return, someone should lose their head.

SoCalTwinsfan said...

Most people are so sure that Torii and Johan are both gone because the Twins will never put out the money to sign their own free agents. Well, those same people were pretty sure that Radke was gone, twice. They were also sure Shannon Stewart was gone. And Radke's first deal and Stewart's deal were not hometown discounts. If anything, they were above the market price.

The Twins haven't been able to sign everyone they wanted, but in this run of success, how many players have the Twins lost that they wish they had back? Eddie Guardado? He had one good season in Seattle before getting hurt. LaTroy Hawkins? He was aging and easily replacable. A.J. Pierzynski? Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.

You can look to history to try to guage what the Twins will do, but they're in pretty much unprecedented territory. And if they let all of their top players go after finally getting a new ballpark, Minnesota's politicians are just crazy enough to try to figure out how to stop the ballpark from being built, and I think the Twins know it.

Anonymous said...

If you really believe that the Pohlads with the new stadium will be receiving less money

The statement was in the present tense. It's nice the Twins will have more money in a few years, but it doesn't do much good right now. Or are you a Republican who spends the future fans money for what you want today?

ou want a continued blueprint for mediocrity--allow free agents to leave your ballclub and get NOTHING in return for them.

No, a blueprint for mediocrity is developing great players and then trading them away instead of adding the players needed to win now. The Twins have a team with a bunch of star players coming into their primes. Santana is one of those. You hang onto him as long as you can and try to win. And if that means you only get a couple draft choices as compensation, too bad.

And I agree with socaltwins - there is no guarantee the Twins plan to let Santana walk. But, like Hunter, they may need to give him a chance to test the market before they can sign him. I think most of the Santana trade talk is just fan boredom and sports writers need for a story.