NASHVILLE – This was not a no-brainer. You could make a strong case either way on whether the Yankees should have included Ian Kennedy along with Phil Hughes and Melky Cabrera to land Johan Santana.
So you can understand why they seemed so tortured in the decision-making even after Hank Steinbrenner announced last night that his club was out of the running, that they were comfortable keeping all of their youngsters. But as tough as the choice was, I think the Yankees made the wrong one and here is why:
1. You cannot act like just any other team is getting Santana. The Red Sox became the strong frontrunners. One AL GM said, “If the Yankees had gotten Santana, the race is real interesting. But if the Red Sox get him, the gap is really significant.” Boston looks dynastic with Josh Beckett and Santana atop the rotation, and a dynamic supporting cast.
2. The Yanks had minor concerns that after Santana struck out 17 on Aug. 19 that he stopped throwing his slider and was 2-4 with a 5.11 ERA in his final seven starts. But, at most, it is a tiny red flag. The Yanks consider Santana the majors’ best pitcher. And the price for the best pitcher in his prime (29 in March) should be staggering. Don’t think like a Yankee fan. Think like a Twin executive now, and think how much you would want in return. And consider that in his first few months on the job that new Minnesota GM Bill Smith is probably making the defining trade of his tenure.
A Hughes/Cabrera/Kennedy package is sizeable. You can make the case that the best package received for a pitcher of this type recently occurred in 1998 when the Mariners obtained Carlos Guillen, Freddy Garcia and John Halama for Randy Johnson. The problem for Houston, though, wasn’t surrendering Guillen, Garcia and Halama. It was that they had Johnson for just a half a season. He then went on to win four Cy Youngs with Arizona. If he had done that for the Astros, the trade payout would have been inconsequential for the Astros. In this case, the acquiring team knows it is signing Santana for 5-7 years.
3. The draft is rigged now. Players such as Kennedy, Joba Chamberlain and Andrew Brackman fall deep enough in the draft so that the Yanks can overpay them when other clubs won’t. The Yanks have to feel confident that in the next few drafts they will find more Kennedys.
4. How good is this Yankee package? Hughes is the surest thing, and he has a questionable work ethic and more of an injury history at 21 than Santana at 28. There are many baseball people who like Kennedy more than Hughes, but just as many who think he is a fifth starter. It is possible that outside of a strong Yankee lineup that protects him, Cabrera would be a fourth outfielder. The idea that all of these players are going to play well for a long period for the Yanks is folly, whereas barring catastrophic injury Santana is close to a sure thing.
5. The Yanks have invested heavily in a veteran/win-now lineup. But the rotation as constituted is probably a few years away from winning. Santana changes that.
6. Santana is what the Yanks have tried and failed to grab for about a decade – an unquestioned ace. They have gone old with Johnson and Kevin Brown. They have gone exotic with Jose Contreras and Hideki Irabu. They have gone with pitchers they thought were trending upward such as Carl Pavano, Javier Vazquez and Jeff Weaver. All failed. But there is no guesswork with Santana. He has won two AL Cy Youngs. He is in the midst of a Hall-of-Fame run.
Do I understand the Yankee counter-argument? You bet. Hughes and Kennedy represent a combined 12 years of controllable, low-cost rotation possibilities. The removal of Cabrera leaves the Yanks without good center field options. The removal of three players of this ilk leaves the Yanks more vulnerable if a need arises over the next 12 months. Santana has endured a heavy workload and is going to be very expensive.
Again, this is not a no-brainer. But this is Santana. In the end, you can’t let Ian Kennedy stand in the way of getting him.