Anthony Santander: 2023 year in review and 2024 forecast

[Aristotelian]

7 minutes ago, forphase1 said:

Yup.  And that's one reason why putting a QO of Santander would be risky.  He's likely to take it as I'm not sure he can land a big enough FA deal to offset getting paid $20+M for 1 year.  

Interesting, I was going to say the opposite. $42M guaranteed is a pretty nice haul for a 32 year old RHB DH. If Santander repeats his 2023 production, he would be hitting FA with about double Soler's career WAR as a switch hitter three years younger. I think he should be in line for a bigger payday, and even so $42M guaranteed would be tough to turn down. And if he accepts, 1/$20M is a compelling values from a risk/reward standpoint. Maybe a slight overpay for the year, but with none of the risk of a multiyear deal. 

[Spy Fox]

52 minutes ago, wildbillhiccup said:

Jake Burger hit 34 home runs in 100 less ABs than Santander last season and I bet that 50% of the posters on this message board have never even heard of him. When are you all going to stop placing so much emphasis on a dying stat like HRs? It's not the 90s anymore! My point is it doesn't matter how many more HRs Santander would have hit in other parks because it's one of the easiest stats to replace. We're almost to the start of Spring Training and there are still multiple FAs available (Martinez, Soler) who can either match or exceed what Santander brings to the table.  That should tell you how much GMs dig/value the long ball. 

I think the idea that Santander is so easily replaceable by those guys may actually be the one overly reliant on the HRs. Burger, Martinez, Soler, these guys can all hit as many or more HRs than Santander but they have other weaknesses in their game relative to him.

This whole group is bad in the field, but Anthony is probably the most passable, and definitely the most passable of the outfielders. That matters in a lineup with as many moving parts as the O's will have. Burger/Martinez/Soler are all the archetype that wallops the ball, but also swings & misses a ton and K's a ton. Anthony is a more balanced hitter type in recent years. 

[btdart20]

25 minutes ago, Just Regular said:

Now just need JD Martinez terms so Santander's agent can start preparing the sales pitches.

Teoscar - my guy's younger

Soler - my guy can field some

JD Martinez - both

Hays' overall value runs strongly with Santander as he's more of a well-rounded 2-way player, but Santander has the same edge on this group as Hays has on him.

Intrinsically it probably takes a Career Year to draw the QO, and practically some of how Kjerstad/Cowser do in 2024 might nudge it if it is close.

Joc Pederson is a context comp.  That QO was a bit out of LF, but maybe the team build/veteranosity angle gets tested... 

Much of the QO does revolve around the HK/Cowser RIP progress though.  If one of those pops/slots in toward the top of the lineup, then it'll take a careful threading of Santander's projection needle to offer/accept the QO.  If HK/Cowser are coded 'failure to thrive', then the QO/FA market compete.

[forphase1]

Just now, Aristotelian said:

Interesting, I was going to say the opposite. $42M guaranteed is a pretty nice haul for a 32 year old RHB DH. If Santander repeats his 2023 production, he would be hitting FA with about double Soler's career WAR as a switch hitter three years younger. I think he should be in line for a bigger payday, and even so $42M guaranteed would be tough to turn down. And if he accepts, 1/$20M is a compelling values from a risk/reward standpoint. Maybe a slight overpay for the year, but with none of the risk of a multiyear deal. 

I expect he will get more,  but will he get close enough to $20M a year to make that QO unattractive?  I just don't know.  Will be curious to see what he gets and where the line is drawn between long term security versus bigger payday for a year.   

As to him accepting the QO, for me it's less about the money or even risk/reward for Santander and moreso about having youth who I think can end up being more complete hitters than Santander.  If he's on the roster,  that's limiting the amount of at bats that Kjerstad and potentially Mayo will get, and it's time for them to get a shot.  

[btdart20]

39 minutes ago, forphase1 said:

Yup.  And that's one reason why putting a QO of Santander would be risky.  He's likely to take it as I'm not sure he can land a big enough FA deal to offset getting paid $20+M for 1 year.  

Agreed.  That's the gamble I'd take in his shoes at least.  

[Frobby]

49 minutes ago, Satyr3206 said:

I don't agree that HR's are overrated. My reasoning is simple. Runs win games. HR's score runs.

You can get on base all you want, but if you don't score it doesn't help you win.

We have a very good idea of the relative value of singles, doubles, triples and homers when it comes to scoring runs.   We have more than 100 years of data and it can be measured relatively precisely.   Those who don’t accept the relative weight of homers compared to other kind of hits, and the importance of not making outs, overrate home runs.   It’s really no more complicated than that.  

Edited February 13 by Frobby

[Just Regular]

1 hour ago, wildbillhiccup said:

Who is he preparing the sales pitch for? Because there's no world in which it makes sense for this team to offer / extend Santander to a long term deal. 

All 30 GM's, same as Corbin Burnes' agent.

[Number5]

Typical internet argument.  LOL.  One guy says Santander is Eddie Murray and the other guy says Santander has little value and is easily replaceable with practically anybody.  I'd say the chance of a meeting of the minds between these two is zero.  

[Can_of_corn]

2 hours ago, Aristotelian said:

Interesting, I was going to say the opposite. $42M guaranteed is a pretty nice haul for a 32 year old RHB DH. If Santander repeats his 2023 production, he would be hitting FA with about double Soler's career WAR as a switch hitter three years younger. I think he should be in line for a bigger payday, and even so $42M guaranteed would be tough to turn down. And if he accepts, 1/$20M is a compelling values from a risk/reward standpoint. Maybe a slight overpay for the year, but with none of the risk of a multiyear deal. 

A team is going to have to pay 3/42 and a pick.

[Frobby]

1 hour ago, Number5 said:

Typical internet argument.  LOL.  One guy says Santander is Eddie Murray and the other guy says Santander has little value and is easily replaceable with practically anybody.  I'd say the chance of a meeting of the minds between these two is zero.  

I do not think it’s that easy to replace players who are average-ish starters.  Those guys don’t grow on trees.   But there are at least 50 of those guys for every Eddie Murray.   

[LTO's]

There were two relievers in all of baseball last year that had higher than a 2.6 fWAR. One of them is out for the year. Impeccable logic there. 

[forphase1]

16 minutes ago, LTO's said:

There were two relievers in all of baseball last year that had higher than a 2.6 fWAR. One of them is out for the year. Impeccable logic there. 

Yes, but it's not that simple.  IF we replace Santander with a player who can replicate much of his value internally, like Mayo for example, then we don't need to replace all 2.6 WAR by the pitcher we acquire.  So, for example, let's say Mayo or Kjerstad can replicate 75% of Santanders WAR, so approximately 2 WAR.  Leaving us down .6 WAR.  Last year it looks like about 104 relievers had a WAR of .6 or higher.  If we get one of those then total WAR for the team has at worst stayed the same, and has possibly increased depending on how much beyond .6 WAR the reliever gives us.  56 relief pitchers had a WAR of 1.6 or higher.  If we happen to gain one of them in the Santander trade, then the net gain for the team could be 1 WAR.

Point being, we don't just need to account for what the pitcher himself brings, but part of the value of Santander will be replaced internally.  If we trade him for a 1 WAR relief pitcher and some prospects, that could be a net gain for the team as we strengthen the bullpen without really harming the defense or offensive production, depending on performance by those who replace him of course.  

That said, I don't think he gets traded.  But nor do I think it would be this huge, gapping hole left in our lineup if he is.  

[LTO's]

28 minutes ago, forphase1 said:

Yes, but it's not that simple.  IF we replace Santander with a player who can replicate much of his value internally, like Mayo for example, then we don't need to replace all 2.6 WAR by the pitcher we acquire. 

That's a pretty massive IF. I don't really understand why you would take on that kind of risk at this time. Kjerstad will receive plenty of playing time this year and Santander doesn't have to be moved for it to happen. Mayo is 22 years old. If there's a lengthy injury to Hays, Mountcastle or O'Hearn, or if Cowser/Kjerstad have a brutal stretch in the majors, it would sure be nice to have an established, consistent big leaguer on the team to help weather the storm. It's not 2019 anymore and Elias, Sig etc. don't operate the way some people on this board do. Just because you have good prospects behind them doesn't mean you get rid of the established big leaguers. Keeping Hays, Mullins and Santander after 2021 is one of the smartest things Elias has done since taking over. 

36 minutes ago, forphase1 said:

Point being, we don't just need to account for what the pitcher himself brings, but part of the value of Santander will be replaced internally.  If we trade him for a 1 WAR relief pitcher and some prospects, that could be a net gain for the team as we strengthen the bullpen without really harming the defense or offensive production, depending on performance by those who replace him of course.  

Or, given the volatility of reliver performance, the 1 WAR pitcher you think you are receiving regresses or gets hurt and you are clearly the loser of the deal. At this stage, I just don't see Elias trading an every day player of Santander's caliber for a reliever. It's bad business. Elias has shown that he is able to build a good bullpen and doesn't need to give up a top 50 hitter in baseball to do it. There are multiple solid pitching prospects in the upper minors in this system and plenty of guys that will be on waivers that are options in the bullpen. Let Santander play out the year, throw him a QO and take the pick. That is the smartest play which is why Elias will handle it that way. 

 

1 hour ago, forphase1 said:

That said, I don't think he gets traded.  But nor do I think it would be this huge, gapping hole left in our lineup if he is.  

I think there's a relatively solid chance it's a pretty big hole left in the lineup. Definitely a higher chance of happening than what you laid out in your post imo. 

[sportsfan8703]

The idea of replacing Santa next year is why we need to have Cowser/Kjerstad/Mayo getting ABs this year instead of O’Hearn. Ease those prospect bats into the lineup while we have the luxury. 

[Sports Guy]

4 hours ago, Number5 said:

Typical internet argument.  LOL.  One guy says Santander is Eddie Murray and the other guy says Santander has little value and is easily replaceable with practically anybody.  I'd say the chance of a meeting of the minds between these two is zero.  

And in typical internet fashion, we now have the guy misrepresenting opinions because he is either lazy or not reading.