Originally Posted by duncan_idaho (Post 9753218)

You have to make a "qualifying" offer, which is a contract of at least one year for at least a set amount based on average contracts of other FA pitchers or some such (kind of like the franchise tag).

If you don't make the offer, you don't get compensation for the pitcher. If no one signs the pitcher before the MLB drat, you don't get compensation.

I'd be hesitant to offer Santana a long-term deal because of his age, his tendency to have terrible years, and his heavy reliance on his slider. But he's been damn good for KC and the trade has worked out perfectly.

If they stay in it, you keep him. You will need him down the stretch and would like to line up Shields and Santana 1-2 in a potential playoff series.



What's crazy is that Santana's AVG FB velocity is up, but only slightly (0.2 MPH). I think the main difference is that his HR/FB rate was crazily high last year.

He's locating better and playing in front of a tremendous run-prevention defense. He does seem to be working in the change and two-seam fastball more, but not a HUGE change.

Originally Posted by Nightfyre (Post 9753436)

I dunno. Santana is pretty inconsistent throughout his career. I would consider selling high on him. And Guthrie. There is no reason to believe that Guthrie will continue to experience his recent success. We have Duffy and Paulino ready to come back in July. I'm just saying.

Originally Posted by duncan_idaho (Post 9753451)

It's unlikely anyone would trade anything of helpful value for Guthrie.

Santana typically has 2 good to great years for every bad year. He's generally pretty consistent throughout a season, whether he's having a good one or a bad one.

Selling high on him midseason probably doesn't help as much as you think it might. You'd have to sell to a contender, and it would be hard to find one of those willing to part with an everyday 2B or RF that makes the same type of impact as Santana.

You probably get more value from him by keeping him the entire season, making a qualifying offer, and picking up a comp. pick i next year's draft.

He'd be a great chip to trade if they're not IN the race at the trade deadline. But you weaken a big part of the rotation by moving him... even with Paulino and Duffy coming back, there's no guarantee those guys are good to go from Day 1.

If the Royals make the playoffs, they need a better No. 2 than Jeremy Guthrie, Luis Mendoza or Felipe Paulino.

Originally Posted by CaliforniaChief (Post 9753517)

And it all comes back to...Moose and Hosmer.

Hosmer is showing signs to me. Moose is not. But if we're going to sustain this run and win more games than lose, those two guys have GOT to contribute.

Originally Posted by BigCatDaddy (Post 9753464)

I'm neg bombing the next poster that mentions trading any contributor off the major league roster at the moment.

Originally Posted by DeezNutz (Post 9753573)

I'd rather try to extend Santana than Shields because of the mileage on the latter's arm/body.

Originally Posted by duncan_idaho (Post 9753644)

Would it surprise you to hear that Ervin Santana actually has thrown MORE innings in his career than James Shields (by about 20-25)?

I was shocked to see that.

Given fairly equal mileage and age (Shields is 1 year older), I'll take the fastball/changeup guy over the fastball/slider guy.

I think Shields more as a staff leader/sage type.