Here’s a look at Carsten Charles Sabathia and Johan Alexander Santana – via the Complete Baseball Encyclopedia – in terms of “seasons with X Runs Saved Above Average (RSAA)” -
Seasons with 50+ RSAA: Sabathia 0, Santana 1
Seasons with 40+ RSAA: Sabathia 2, Santana 3
Seasons with 30+ RSAA: Sabathia 2, Santana 4
Seasons with 20+ RSAA: Sabathia 3, Santana 6
Seasons with 10+ RSAA: Sabathia 4, Santana 7
Now, yes, Santana is 2 years older than Sabathia. However, Santana has been a starter in the majors for 5 full seasons and parts of 2 other seasons whereas Sabathia has been a starter in the majors for 8 full seasons. So, in terms of full seasons as starters, they’re close to each other.
Based on these numbers, why in the world would the Yankees offer Sabathia more money than what Santana is being paid?
10 Responses to “Sabathia Vs. Santana”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
November 15th, 2008 at 8:03 am
The answer to this one is easy:
1. Because the Yankees realize they have a desperate need for starting pitching, which they did not see last year. (Note I say they did not see it; many others among us did. At least Cashman et al have awiken to the reality….)
2. Because acquiring Santana would have also required giving up young players the Yankees did not want to deal.
3. Because there is no other comparable ace on the market this year.
November 15th, 2008 at 8:29 am
Why?
Because he’ll be pitching on the West Coast for the next 5-6 years if they don’t make him an offer he can’t refuse.
And the Yanks really need to fortify their rotation.
It doesn’t take an Einstein to figure this one out.
That said, I’d stop at Sabathia with signing free agent pitchers because Burnett and Lowe would be terrible pickups.
I’d prefer to see them find another starter via the trade market or hope Moose changes his mind and returns next season because nothing but bad could come from signing either Burnett or Lowe.
November 15th, 2008 at 9:39 am
Oh come on Steve. CC is the best available FA right now and what the Yankees want to give him is what is needed to get him over here. You can’t always just compare contract numbers and say it’s unfair based on RSAA. It doesn’t work that way…
November 15th, 2008 at 9:52 am
Good points by Scout, but also Sabathia was a full time starter at the age of 20 through 24 and Santana did not become a starter until he was 25. As we have seen with Hughes, Kennedy, etc. it is not an easy thing for a pitcher to be that young (20, 21, 22, etc.) and have success in the major leagues. The fact that Sabathia was better than league average at such a young age should be seen as a good thing and not a bad thing. He basically had 3 of his first 4 years slighty above league average and another year when he was better than that. Santana was getting lit up in his first two years in the majors at 21/22 years old. Sabathia had pitched 3 full seasons in the majors before Santana even became an effective pitcher in the majors. Again I don’t see this as a bad thing.
This was also the pre-steroids testing era(2001-2003)and it’s possible Sabathia’s RSAA were affected by that. I’d like to see where Sabathia ranks compared to the other starters in those three seasons in RSAA and also how close he was to getting 10 RSAA.
The last three seasons he has been comparable to Santana for the most part. Since Santana is two years older, if Sabathia pitches the next two seasons at his current level then I would bet that he would have 4 seasons with 40+ RSAA, which would be more than Santana has now and it would put him in line with the rest of your chart as well. Also, two of those 7 seasons you are counting for Santana he only pitched 108 and 158 innings. Sabathia, even at the beginning of his career, was pitching 180 innings or more above average, which still has value in helping the team win and resting the bullpen.
I’m not saying that Sabathia is the best pitcher to ever walk the earth, I’m just not sure that this analysis is the best way to compare the two pitchers if you are going to make the case against signing CC to more money than Santana. The fact that no players need to be traded to acquire him makes a big difference right there. Also, how much more is it? like 3-4 million?
November 15th, 2008 at 10:28 am
Based on these numbers, why in the world would the Yankees offer Sabathia more money than what Santana is being paid?
——
Well, they certainly aren’t going to offer him less…
November 15th, 2008 at 12:49 pm
The Yanks have no choice. Their top winner may retire and even if he doesn’t who knows what to expect next year. There was a post a month ago speculating on Wang’s ability to come back 100% from last year’s injury. I want the Yanks to resign Petitte but take a look at the second half of last year. Anyone here want to place any hope in Hughes or Kennedy, I don’t. Joba is it and he is still developing. The Yanks have to sign this guy and build out from there. Without a major infusion of talent on the pitching staff we could be looking at a below .500 season.
November 15th, 2008 at 2:05 pm
Technically he will cost more but Santana would have cost way more if they gave up 4 good prospects from their inventory.
Basically they punted on 2008. They just cant admit it.
November 15th, 2008 at 9:39 pm
Why offer Sabathia more than Santana makes? Does it make sense?
The answer to that depends on the situation.
If the situation is either you sign Sabathia or you sign Santana, then it doesn’t make sense to give Sabathia more than Santana.
But, that is not the situation we are facing. The situation is you sign Sabathia or you don’t have either. And, facing that situation, if it takes more to sign him than what Santana makes, then you have to do it.
November 16th, 2008 at 9:55 am
I think there is more to this bid than meets the eye. The Yankees have an enormous new source of stadium cash flow and are once again in a position to far outspend the competition (including the Mets and Red Sox) perhaps by as much as two times if they were so inclined (this is speculation as I am not privy to team financials). By giving Sabathia a contract that sets a new high water mark, they have effectively moved the market for all pitchers. In doing so, they make it both harder for other teams to sign free agents that the Yankees may covet and more difficult for those teams to tie up their existing pitchers who are not yet eligible for free agency to long term deals (i.e. into the potential FA years).
Perhaps it sounds a bit Machiavellian, but it makes good economic sense to me.
December 10th, 2008 at 10:47 pm
[...] who is CC Sabathia? Well, he’s not Johan Santana in terms of his career stats – that’s not even close. And, he doesn’t pitch like, say, Curt Schilling in the [...]