He will go to the Yankees if they (and they can) sign him long term. Ian Kennedy and Melky + 1 minor leaguer to be named later is the most likely package. The Yanks are angry over the Sox winning again and A-Rod leaving. They are going to make a HUGE splash and aren't going to give up Hughes or Joba. Plus they saved millions from A-Rod opting out and they are for sure looking to spend them ASAP and what better than a dominant lefty to protect that short porch?
2007-11-13 01:30:00
·
answer #1
·
answered by Legends Never Die 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
It would have to be the team that has the best young talent available. They have already told the Yankees that they want Cano, another prospect and either Hughes, Kennedy or Chamberlain. Some of the other teams that could do it are:
Giants: Would probably take a package that includes two of the three following pitchers: Cain, Lowry, Lincecum.
Rangers: Saltalamacchia and probably 2 other prospects.
Dodgers: A package that would include Kemp, Loney or Ethier plus pitching.
Angels would probably have to include Howie Kendrick in the deal and the Marlins have already asked for him if they want Miguel Cabrera.
The Mets just don't have anything to offer the Twins. Milledge's star has fallen drastically and Heilman hasn't been showcased enough as a starter to get enough interest.
They wouldn't trade him to anyone within their division unless an over the top offer was made so the White Sox, Indians and Tigers are out.
2007-11-13 03:21:47
·
answer #2
·
answered by sdmf4u2000 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Santana will be a class A Free Agent so the Twins have to weigh the value of one year of Santana and two high draft picks to what they'd get for him in trade. Remember the Twins are not a bad team, so it isn't like he's the only good player on a 50 win team. To get him from the Twins teams will have to give up a very good young position player. For the Yankees I believe the package would be Cano and one of their top three young pitchers.
The Twins are one of the few teams that have pitching to spare especially if Liriano comes back strong. They have weaknesses at various positions which is what they'd want to fill in any trade. Right now I believe those are 2B, 3B, and CF.
I feel that the Dodgers are the best bet because they have spare young position player talent that they really aren't eager to play along with some quality young pitching talent to sweeten the deal. Plus they have the cash to lock up Santana long term.
The Reds fan in me though would love to see Cincinnati get him and the owner pony up the cash to keep him. I believe that I would trade Hamilton, Encarncion and a pitching prospect for Santana.
2007-11-13 01:42:00
·
answer #3
·
answered by Shawn C 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think the Dodgers, Rangers, Rockies, and Yankees are the best possible destinations for Santana. I think the Dodgers would trade for him since they have all that young talent. The Rangers would want him to be their ace and have someone who could really go more than 6 innings. The Rockies would want him to just help them get back to the World Series, but this time they would have some real known pitchers. The Yankees are a possibility to replace Clemens and Pettitte who are both right now gone.The Yankees need the pitching right now to go with Wang and help young guys like Hughes. I would see Kennedy, Melky, and 2 or 3 more young guys from AAA.
2007-11-13 05:10:26
·
answer #4
·
answered by Topher 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
So many variables.
Teams, prior to making trades always want to talk with the player to see how willing they are do to a long term deal.
If Santana says "I want to test the FA market regardless", his trade value goes down.
The twins get the best of the bargain in most situations and have the ability to find the hidden gem in your organization.
I know I would much rather have Santana at $18 mil than Arod at $28 mil. (not to mention $35 mil)
I agree that the Dodgers do have the young players, but I think also Seattle, if they are ready to compete again, may be interested. They typically have a good farm system.
It's really pointless to include the Yankees in this as they would need to give up a Hughes and Chamberlain.
Edit: Money RARELY comes into trades because there is a cap on what money you can send and it's only to make up difference in salaries.
Also, why would the Twins trade for Rolen and Mulder, two big $, underperforming players.
Think of it this way, look in AA or AAA and think of the one or two prospects you never want your team to deal. THOSE are the players the Twins would want.
They don't want Ramirez, they want Ellsbury AND Pedroia, they don't want Jeter, they want Hughes and Chamberlain, they don't want Jeff Kent, they want Kemp and ..... you get the point.
2007-11-13 01:10:08
·
answer #5
·
answered by brettj666 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
Santana is not a free agent until after the 2008 season and if a team wants him now they are going to have to give up something really good. The Twins don't want to go to arbitration with Santana but they have time to hold out for something good. A team like the Dodgers might be willing to give up a young player to get him but I don't see a team like the Yankees giving up any of their young pitchers that the Twins would be looking for.
2007-11-13 00:53:26
·
answer #6
·
answered by Frizzer 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
I'm hoping The NY Yankees. The Yanks have the position players and young pitching talent that the Twins might want if they can't keep Santana.
2007-11-13 00:50:06
·
answer #7
·
answered by Oz 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
i think of the pink Sox would have a superb rotation by using including Santana and that they'd commerce a selection of of pitchers for different desires. besides the undeniable fact that, i think of ordinarily they try to stress the up the fee that the Yankees will ought to pay to get him.
2016-10-02 06:31:07
·
answer #8
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
A team with a boat load of $$$$$ and players and would be willing to deal. I'd say the Yankees seems like a good fit.
2007-11-13 01:11:22
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
How bout to St. Louis for Scott Rolen and Mark Mulder?
2007-11-13 01:13:31
·
answer #10
·
answered by Js_5 5
·
0⤊
2⤋