Sometimes the best trades . . .

Santana may be having the mid-career slide that many top starters go through. The great ones find new ways to win, and go on to have great second acts. Of course, some of them get bigger and beefier and their heads swell and they're kind of irritable all the time... but most of them do it without needles.

Anyway, chances are Santana will pull through and remain a great pitcher for years to come. That said, I'm with you, Chad: last winter I was hoping that neither the Red Sox nor the Yankees would trade for him. That 4-for-1 trade would have been horrendous for the Sox, especially in financial terms; no matter how high your payroll, you have to have significant contributions from pre-arbitration players. If the Sox had traded for Santana and signed a mega-deal with him, it would have dramatically reduced their payroll flexibility to deal with other needs.

I should note that Guidry had some pretty damn good years after '80 - he won 22 one season, though with a mediocre ERA. Santana has always reminded me of him, an undersized lefty with filthy stuff, though the comp isn't completely valid

Right on. I too was intrigued with the thought of a Beckett/Johan starting rotation. But alas, the best trades are the ones not made. Remember too back in 2003, when it was all but certain that AROD was coming to Boston, the bounty to offset 1 Manny contract was a young A Ball pitcher named Jon Lester. Just think 2 World Championships, 1 WS MVP, 1 deciding game 4 victory later and I am glad that Theo didn't pull the trigger on either one.

Actually, that 2003 deal was all but done but wasn't consummated because of the players union's objection to the restructuring of Arod's contract with everyone (if I recall correctly) reporting that Gene Orza was the one that put the kibosh on it.

As for Santana, I too felt it would've been great to have him in the rotation, but the financial ramifications as mentioned earlier would have been onerous. Smart business move.

Loved the picture of Lou P. I swear, if he had a cowboy hat on and a rolled up cigarette in his mouth he could have passed for someone out of Rawhide with a name something like Johnny Lucky or Luke Hightower, gunslinger for hire.

I never liked giving up any of the guys they were mentioning for a bunch of reasons: 1) They already have Beckett; 2) Santana is a drain on the economy ($19-20 million a year); 3) Depth is always a good thing; 4) Jeff Bagwell. Lester & Masterson; or even worse, Lester, Masterson, and Ellsbury; or Coco & Buccholz and another guy? Forget it. It's way too much. All of those guys are major league ready as evidence by their performances this year, and all of them are under control of the Sox with reasonable contracts for years to come.

Completely agree. I was praying everytime I turned on the radio that I would hear he was traded somewhere in the NL. Theo played it perfectly. Increase the bid just enough to knock the Yanks out of it, but not enough to match what the Twins were demanding. It was like a chess match, and at this point looking back, the sox won.

Theo and his crew have convinced the many of us in Red Sox Nation that prudent, long term benefit decisions are in the best interests of the club. Ten years ago we would've been salivating at the thought of Santana in the rotation, but today we recognize the stellar scouting and farm system that are central factors in the Red Sox becoming twice world champions. It's whole new way of doing business in the front office and almost all of us are finally on board with it!

I was in favor of trading for Santana.

It’s just too early to tell if we should have made the deal.

At age 28, Santana may yet give the Mets their money’s worth. But sure, for the time being, I’m glad we are in first place and still have all of our youngsters. Some of them will develop into starters, relievers, everyday players. Others, like Lowrie, may be left out in the cold since their position is already taken by a player w a long term contract.

But, If you don’t need the young talent -- trade them wisely !

We lack the ability to win on the road. We need a long term replacement for ‘Tek. We need middle relief.

We need starting pitching. Wakefield is nearing the end. Buchholz is not ready for the starting rotation; that’s why they gave his spot to Colon.

How many productive years do Manny and David have in the three-four spots ? One year ? Two years ? Or less ? Do we say goodbye to Manny in November 2008 by not exercising his option ?

This game is like Gin Rummy. You hold as many of your cards as you can as long as you can before throwing down at the right time.

sorry....but Theo was never going to make this trade. He wanted to push the price up high enough to get the Yankee to either blow the farm or pass on him. This was a bluff from day one. If they wanted him, they would have gotten it done.

Well...as to the ARod deal, Theo actually DID pull the trigger. The only reason ARod is/was not in a Red Sox uniform was when the MLB Players Association stepped in and failed to approve the contract that ARod and the Red Sox re-negotiated as it called for ARod to receive a reduced salary. I was never happy that Ellsbury was part of the discussion but I must admit that I was OK with trading Lester, Masterson and Lowrie in a 3 for 1, but after seeing Masterson and Lowrie, wow...super glad Santana is in a Met uniform and not a Sox uniform.

Have to agree. Sometimes the best trades are the ones you don't make.How can you forget Bags or even last year the trade for Gagne?

Great no trade for the sox.I wanted to trade Lester,Masterson ,and Lowrie,but glad Theo didn't now.Theo is the best GM in all sports.Hope he never leaves.As for needing a repacment for Tec.Look at Jon Still in are farm system.He will be Boston's catcher for the future.Then we still got Masterson,Bowden, and are 1st round pick a couple years ago in Danial Bard.Go look at there farm system it looks great.We will need to find a big bat to replace Manny in a few years,but we look great now and in the future thanks to Theo.Go Sox!

I agree Sox never intended to make this trade, but Santana's decline is greatly exaggerated...his Cy Young years he was a combined 6-7 in April/May with a 4.45 ERA and 1.30 WHIP...he's a slow starter adjusting to a new team and league. Bank on 18+ wins if Mets can close out his starts...The team that blew it is the Yankees, who now are gutting their bullpen to solve their starter problem. Sox front office is savvy, but they'll look a lot better if Schill can give them something in the 2nd half for the $10MM worth of weigh-in's...The Santana non-deal will be even more enjoyable if Yanks finish behind the Rays!

The most alarming thing to me was his lousy (for him) second half last year (4.04 ERA). In previous seasons, he had made a habit of becoming more dominant as the season went on.

Put this up there with not getting Pavano, Contreras, Mussina, Damon....

Yah can we talk about Damon for a second? How smart was that non-deal by the Sox while Theo was on hiatus? I bet Damon regrets taking the extra 12MM from NYY. He was the city's icon here and he's a nobody there.

Theo is like the old bull who suggested walking down the hill and getting them all, rather than running down and getting one.

Cashman made a bad move by getting Damon. he was getting up in age and now is getting up in age. The Yanks probably should have gotten Santana. If you look at it now Hughes is on the DL, Kennedy has had one good start, and they probably should have tried to put in Austin Jackson instead of Melky.

I was dead set against trading Jacoby Ellsbury as part of that trade package for Johan Santana. If they would have included Coco Crisp instead and put in only Justin Masterson and a lower level prospect I could have gone for that three-for-one deal. However, to include Jacoby and Jed Lowrie in such a package would have been given too much away and I was glad the deal never went through. My only regret is that we took so much time involved in trade talks that Theo Epstein was unable to work on getting the bullpen help we seem to need so badly right now. Then, again, who knew our pen would be so bad this season?

I know this is Red Sox Nation, but give the Twins some credit as well. What were they supposed to do? Jump at the first weak offers for Johan.

Twins fans watched Bill Smith get raked over the coals for the offer he eventually took for Johan, yet now that the season's began, Carlos Gomez has turned into a pretty solid lead-off hitter for us and Deolis Guerra is pitching like a young Francisco Liriano down in A ball. The Twins can scout talent like none other. They took what they could get.

The two best moves in the whole Johan-ordeal, was Theo playing mind games with the Yanks (I'll give you Red Sox fans that) but also Bill Smith taking what he could. They Yankee's prospects were overrated (Hughes and Kennedy) and Melky is no Gomez, even now in Gomez's youth.

I'd say the Twins made out pretty decnt. And we get to say that Johan's best days, were played with us.

Uh, what? You're "gloating?" Santana is 6-3, with a 3-point-something ERA. And you are "gloating?" He is among the league leaders in strikeouts. And you are "gloating?"

A notoriously slow starting pitcher is off to a solid start. And you are "gloating?"

I'm going to laugh when Santana wins 20. And, yes. I will be "gloating."

Steve, you need to go back and read it again - not only what I wrote, but what Olney wrote.

Beyond that, your vague, cherry-picked numbers are misleading. His ERA, 3.41, would be his worst since 2001. As would his current ERA+, and that's despite the move to the NL. You can't completely depend on him to have strong second half again, because that trend ended last year. He's given up 12 homers in 74 innings - another ominous sign.

Santana's on a pace for 18 wins. If he wins 20, congrats. But it sure looks to me like the Mets have a once-great pitcher who has begun the subtle stages of decline. You'll notice eventually.

Hilarious. My "cherry-picked numbers" are "vague?"

Santana is now 7-3, with a 3.20 ERA. Oh, yeah. He's in decline alright.

I'll never understand sports fans. They want something to be true, so they say it is true. Comical. Truly comical.

EDIT, CF: Which is exactly what you're doing.

One more thing, Chad -- just because I found this particularly amusing.

We are supposed to dismiss the fact that Santana is historically a slow starter. We are supposed to ignore the fact that, over his career, his first half ERA has been 3.57 and his second half ERA has been 2.79. We throw that out the window because he had a poor second half last year. We ignore that his current ERA is well below his career first half ERA. A single half season complete undoes a career trend.

Sorry. But that's just dumb. If you don't think so, can we agree that Josh Beckett is in career decline based on 2008's first half?

That's what I thought.

You're the one cherry-picking, my friend.

EDIT, CF: Again, go back and read what I wrote, then what Olney wrote. He had a bad half season at a time of year when he was usually historically awesome . . . scouts say his stuff isn't the same . . . he's giving up homers at an alarming rate (as is Beckett, actually) . . . and he's now in the weaker league. Listen, I like Santana. He's a joy to watch pitch. But he is not as good as he was. He's not. And I'm pretty sure he's not going to get better. If you don't want to accept that scouts and numbers suggest he's slipping, that's your prerogative. But I'm thrilled the Sox didn't trade some combination of Lester, Ellsbury, Masterson and Lowrie for him, especially with the nine-figure contract extension.

What a crappy thing to do. You actually attack my posts with an "edit" function? What garbage.

Santana is in the top 10 in the NL in almost every meaningful category. During the time of the season in which he has historically been his worst. That means a lot. Continue to delude yourself if you must. But this is my last visit to your blog. Now, please: Edit my post to suit you.

Class act, BoSock.

EDIT, CF: I didn't attack your post. Didn't change a word. I answered it, reasonably. You're irrational just because someone disagrees with you. I have no use for a reader like you. Good riddance.

Chad, I agree with the point of your column..

As an aside: As to the Edit responses, I like them -- providing you have your web geeks give you a way (styles or something) to make your edits more obvious. It took me a moment to figure out that you were replying in his posts... maybe I am nitpicking but maybe a different color for your responses? Surrounding them with "[" and "]"? This is going to come up again, and clarity is good.

Keep up the good work... I enjoy your writing even when I disagree.

where have you gone, mr. finn?

Where have I gone? I'm right here, approving vague comments . . .

Theo has done a great job at building the club. look at Damon and Pedro Martinez. Neither player was worth the money. Where would the Red Sox be right now if they had made this trade. Injuries have forced the Red Sox to use the players that they would have traded. I could see them in third place instead of first if this trade had been made.

"Have a little faith"... in the people in the know. And it's NOT the typical fan, who always seems to think they know more than the execs and scouts. Your dating Carrie Underwood, but you THINK Demi is a better fit?? Wow... but wait a second, Demi is such a babe, and has a killer body, and....

I think 'Steve' is dating Kathy Griffin and telling himself she's Giselle Bundchen. As for the Sox trading away the farm for Santana, I'm glad that deal was not done. If Theo had traded Ellsbury et al for anything less than a ship full of gold I'd have been pissed. Santana is THE dominant lefty in MLB but not worth the future 1/3 of the Red Sox. As for Manny for A-Rod (The Albatross), another good deal undone and good riddance. No team has won a championship with A-Rod. Period. His numbers are great, but he's a negative factor for team chemistry.
And I'm very glad that Tha Amazing Johnny Damon and his little league arm are with the Yankees. I think The Idiot's recent power surge can be attributed to his doing bad stuff with his "big brother" Giambi. In Theo I trust.

If the Sox are lucky all teams will have the outlook of Steve and use the old Red Sox strategy. He would rather have Santana at 7-4 than a combination of Masterson and Lester at 8-4. This does not even include Elsbury and Lowrie. I guess that is why the Mets are 7 out in the weak NL east and are under 500. Where the Sox are in first place in spite of all the injuries in the tough AL east. I hope Santana wins 25 so that Steve will be happy but the Mets still are not even as good as the Yankees. If they were in the AL they would be around 400. A good return on the players and money invested. Willie and Omar are doing a great job keep it up.

Santana's always a slow starter. From 2005-2007, here are his stats:
April: 3.85 ERA, 13HR
May: 3.12 ERA, 16HR

So on average in the past three years, at this point in the season, Santana has had an ERA of ~3.48 with an average of 9 1/2 HR. Let's take a look where he is now:

2.85 ERA, 12 HR, including a 0.87 ERA in 2 starts in June. That's dealing with the adjustment to a different league, and a much better offensive division. I'm glad the Sox didn't trade for Santana, but the guy's doing exactly what he's always done. Were these scouts predicting his demise the same ones saying Gagne looked as good as ever?

I'm an avid reader of your blog. Hope you get back to regular posting soon! Would love to hear what you have to say abouth the C's championship and the current state of the Sox!

Did Lou's barber use a level when he cut his hair?

I agree with your opinion, Chad. I also believe that Theo should not make a July 31 deadline-deal involving any one of the prospects still in the minors. Picking up a Gagne or a Suppan no matter what the Yankees might do would be a mistake. The farm system has never been better and we can't afford to hand a competitor someone like Moss, Anderson, Kalish, or Reddick