The best pitcher in baseball is going to be traded, and it won't be to Pittsburgh. If you guessed New York, the Bronx area in particular, you're probably getting warm to the point of combustion. Just in case you are faint of heart, laying a little side money on the RedSox isn't a bad idea.
Money talks and right about now it is screaming the name Johan Santana. The Twins and their owner, Carl Polhad, don't want to lay out $13 million next season. They are afraid Santana will walk away as a free agent in 2009. Also that they might miss out on the opportunity to not pay that $13 million. You see the Twins are operating on the highly successful Pittsburgh Pirates model. Get the saps to buy you a new ball park, rid the roster of veterans, and raise the cost of parking and hot dogs.
The Yankees have come calling for Santana, bearing a lovely fruit basket with a selection that includes Phil Hughes and Melky Cabrera. The Twins, like a lovestruck teenage girl who runs to the curb when the horn blows, can be had for dinner. At McDonald's. From the drive thru.
Think hard before answering. You can have another season of a pitcher who has gone 93-44 with the Twins, struck out 235 in 219 innings, and has a four to one strikeout to walk ratio. On the other hand you have a rookie with a 4.46 ERA and a center fielder with less power than could be generated on a hamster wheel. What would you do?
What the Twins will do is take the Yankees offer, or a similar one from the RedSox. Not because Santana is going to leave in 09', not to have a foundation to build on, not because it's the best thing for the team. Simply because Carl Polhad, one of the 100 wealthiest men in America, could care less. This is the same Carl Polhad who enthusiastically embraced the idea a few years back of letting the team go out of business. The only reason there is still baseball in the Twin Cities is that Donald Fehr and the Player's Union stood firm against contraction.
On some level it is futile to even think about. Fans will come to the new stadium and watch AAAA baseball. Bud Selig won't stop a one-sided deal. And here on December 2, 2007 I can already tell you the RedSox and Yankees will be in the playoffs next season and the Orioles, Rays, and Blue Jays have already been financially and mathematically eliminated.
It's perplexing. Owners can't stop free agents from taking the Yankees money, but can't they summon enough gumption to stop giving players away to New York? Steinbrenner & Son have already priced most of them out of ever competing for the pennant. Doesn't that make them a little angry? Doesn't that make them want never to do business with New York again?
Make deals with terrorists. Negotiate with the Mafia. Take money from a political action committee. Subscribe to the Dish Network to get the NFL Network. You can be forgiven for those.
But deal with the Yankees? Just so no. Somebody has to.
It's about time somebody said it. We complain about the Yankees and Red Sox getting all the great players, but why don't we get angry with the teams who give away said players to them? I'd love to see all the GM's in baseball stand up to the Evil Empires and not give them any big-name players. How funny would it be if those two teams had to face Santana in Baltimore every year?
I read that when the Diamondbacks were looking to trade Curt Schilling the Yankees and Red Sox both expressed interest. The Diamondbacks' GM asked the Yankees for players he knew he wouldn't get just so that he could stick it to them by trading him to the Red Sox. Of course, the same guy gave the Yankees Randy Johnson a year later, so I don't know how true that is.
When (as if) will MLB finally allow some sort of parity? A salary penalty does not work, as has been shown. I guess that if the penalties were high enough, perhaps. As a Royals fan (cringe) I remember the days in the 70s and 80s when we could be competitive. Now that is a distant memory.
Is it better for the MLB to have the same few teams in the playoffs every year? I think not! But I guess that I must not be from the east coast.