Yanks-Santana Trade History: Murray Chass Reporting What?

According to some of the baseball blogs, Murray Chass of the NY Times, is reporting that the Twins are willing to leave Ian Kennedy out of a potential Santana trade, substituting him with Jeff Marquez (another solid young pitching prospect). That would bring the grand total for Santana to Phil Hughes, Melky Cabrera and Marquez.

It took me a while to write about this story today because I was a bit confused. A lot of my fellow bloggers are reporting this as “new” news. But, am I wrong when I say that this was the package the Twins were interested in during the GM Meetings earlier this month? In the beginning, the Twins were asking for both Phil Hughes and Ian Kennedy (I know that much). The Yankees balked at the deal though, and rightfully so.

Then, at the GM Meetings a few weeks ago, after the Yankees had made the difficult of including Phil Hughes in the Santana trade, the Twins actually agreed to work with a “lesser” package of players (one that was without Ian Kennedy), one that featured Hughes, Melky, and another good prospect (someone like Horne, Jackson, Tabata, Marquez, Hilligoss, etc.). The Yankees didn’t really like this either. They felt that adding Hughes to the trade was already enough when coupled with Melky Cabrera. The deal actually stalled due to the inclusion of a third prospect because the Yankees wanted to add a mid-level player (Marquez?) while the Twins wanted someone higher (Horne, Jackson, Tabata, etc.).

Once this occurred, the Twins sort of worked the Yankees over, as they asked for a package that looked something like: Hughes, Melky, Marquez, and a fourth prospect of tremendous value (Horne, Tabata, etc.). The Yankees, once again, balked at this package, because of two things (predominantly): 1) it would gut their farm system and they did not want to give in on a fourth (valuable) prospect and 2) money, due to the return of Andy Pettitte. Remember, the Yankees were the ones who actually walked away from the 4-1 deal because Pettitte was returning and they were worried about payroll and financial flexibility. If they had agreed to the 4-1 deal (even though they didn’t want to lose out on a Horne or Tabata), they would still have to sign Santana to an extension that would dramatically increase their payroll (and subsequently, their luxury tax). Therefore, the Yanks left the deal at 3-for-1 (unless the Twins would accept a fourth, lower-level prospect), holding firm on Hughes-Melky-Marquez.

Then, the Red Sox got involved and sort of upset whatever form of leverage that the Yankees thought they had. The Sox were offering packages like Elsbury/Lester, Crisp, Masterson, and Lowrie, while the Yankees were still content with their offer of Hughes, Melky, and Marquez (and, if necessary, a fourth, lower-level talent). The Twins then used this trade war to create their own leverage, simply by remaining quiet. The Twins, from what I’ve seen, have never outwardly told the Yankees, since that point, that the Yankees had to include Ian Kennedy. They know by staying quiet and making it look as if they’re close to a deal with the BoSox, then maybe, just maybe, the Yankees will concede and offer Kennedy in the deal as well. Many papers were reporting that it would be the only way to get Santana since the Red Sox were offering a greater package.

However, here’s where the “Twins have agreed to back off Ian Kennedy” story comes back in. The package the Sox were offering to the Twins never looked like a better package than Hughes, Melky and Marquez. With the Yanks deal, the Twins would get two major league ready players on the cheap (one, a pitcher with ace potential), while the Red Sox package would be riddled with holes (if Lester is included, he’s wild; if Elsbury is included, he’s the only, truly valuable player that’s been big league tested). No matter what the Boston papers might say, I don’t see how the Boston deal is better than what the Yankees were already offering (even without Ian Kennedy).

And, the Yankees know that. The Hughes-Melky-Marquez deal has been on the table for a long time. The fourth prospect (if the Twins want it), however, was a problem that both the Twins and the Yankees could not see eye-to-eye on. Also, money proved to be the biggest factor since the Yankees are worried about financial flexibility. Adding Santana, with a fresh new extension in hand, would put the Yankees payroll hovering around $230 million plus. That’s not a number that they’re very comfortable with. Of course, Steinbrenner has said that he’ll do what he has to do and pay what he has to pay to get Santana, but a lot of that is just arrogance and tough talk.

So, when the Murray Chass “says” that the Twins are backing off of their Ian Kennedy inclusion, it’s not necessarily a surprise or even true, “new” news. In fact, if you read the article in its entirety, there’s nothing that states that this is anything new. Chass talks about the Kennedy inclusion in a past tense, stating that “at one point the Twins wanted Kennedy,” and that point was earlier this month (we all read about that already). It was the Yankees who had walked away previously from a Hughes-Melky-Marquez deal (earlier this month), because of the fourth player that the Twins were seeking and the money necessary to retain Santana’s services.

Chass talks about all of this in his article which predominantly focuses on the luxury tax that the Yankees paid this year. I don’t really know what happened when this was reported today, but there really is nothing new in this article by Chass about Ian Kennedy, Hughes, Santana, etc, or any future deals. I’m not sure which blog posted it first, but I’m assuming some folks ran with it once others began posting it. I think River Ave Blues noticed this as well, as their posting of this Chass article (despite posting it as “news”) states that this could simply be nothing at all, since the Melky-Hughes-Marquez (including Hilligoss) had been put forth earlier this month by the Twins.

So to summarize, there is nothing new on the Santana trade front. Currently, it looks the same way it did yesterday.