A Steal of a Deal?

The common perception following announcement of a trade between the Mets and the Twins was that the Mets stole Johan Santana from the low-budget Twins. Generally, it is accepted that the package from the Mets was worse than the compensation the Red Sox and Yankees were willing to give the Twins at the winter meetings.

Johan Santana is a very good pitcher. The Mets probably should have won the NL East last year and are a clear favorite heading into 2008. Subtract an aging Tom Glavine and add Santana (and Pedro Martinez for a year ... if he's healthy), the Mets should be better.

But, as part of the deal, Santana is getting 7 years (the one remaining on his contract and six more) guaranteed. And, he's not coming at a bargain like Jake Peavy (~$17 million per), Santana will receive just more than $150 million, an average of approximately $21.5 million per year.

It is way too early to determine whether or not this deal is a steal for the Mets. If Santana pitches well and the Mets don't win, what have they actually gained? Or, what if all the innings on Santana's arm start to catch up with him? Santana isn't a big guy (standing just 6 ft tall), will turn 29 this spring and has logged 200+ innings in each of the last four years. If, 3 years down the road, Santana starts dealing with injury issues consistently (like Pedro Martinez did), the Mets won't be getting great bang for their buck.

I'm not sure the Twins got great value for Santana, but it might be lose-lose in this deal because the Mets could have waited a year, signed Santana for a similar deal, and not had to deal Gomez and Co.