Comments on: Mets In Three Way For Santana?

By: sidthejewwwwww

sidthejewwwwww — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 02:24:19 +0000

Another tall tale indeed. Cannot be true. Minaya has already stated Reyes was untouchable.

By: Andrew Vazzano

Andrew Vazzano — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 00:40:04 +0000

This rumor was busted.

MLBTR was tricked.

By: rzanca

rzanca — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 23:21:16 +0000

Well… in my humble opinion Santana isn’t worth Reyes alone!

Harebrained trades where we capitulate after saying particular stars are more or less non-negotiable will not help us achieve greatness. Reyes is ascendant, no doubt.

By: Andrew Vazzano

Andrew Vazzano — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 22:24:08 +0000

But is Coco and Lester + prospects really that good?

I still think the Yankees package was much, much, better…but I don’t think they want him to go to the Yanks, or the AL for that matter.

By: Greg Stupore

Greg Stupore — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 22:18:48 +0000

It does but I cannot imagine that Twins fans up in Minnesota can be happy with this deal, especially with the packages they were being offered only a few days ago by the Yankees and Red Sox.

By: Andrew Vazzano

Andrew Vazzano — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 22:06:10 +0000

It makes sense that they would get a Santana replacement, instead of just hitters.

By: Greg Stupore

Greg Stupore — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 22:03:21 +0000

Good point Gary, looking at this a second time around the Twins don’t seem to be getting much out of this, although the article does suggest Haren is the type of pitcher they would like to get in exchange for Santana.

By: Andrew Vazzano

Andrew Vazzano — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 21:56:19 +0000

Beat me to it Greg.

I can’t see them trading away Reyes.
I suggested Ryan Church or Carlos Gomez and Fernando Martinez in place of Reyes…
Thoughts?

By: Gary Grund

Gary Grund — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 21:56:05 +0000

Can’t see this at all.

The first package shows the Twins pretty much trading Johan Santana for Dan Haren straight up. Makes entirely no sense.