I would say that the straight get-that-ring value proposition is less important than the market situation.

With Santana, the Twins had trouble expanding the market even to two teams, let alone three. Not only are there a dozen teams or more that could be in on Sabathia, I would bet that literally a dozen teams are already discussing him as a potential acquisition. Anybody remember the enormous WTF?? reaction when Colon went to the Expos?

There is no team that is in contention that won’t have an interest in Sabathia, and that demand will definitely drive up every team’s perception of what kind of price is “reasonable” — Winner’s Curse is our bitch. Some are already speculating that teams are going to think about fringy guys like Paul Byrd more seriously. I don’t believe for a moment that teams won’t see Sabathia as a massively different value than Byrd. Paul Byrd is a great choice for the job of “warm body in the rotation.” Sabathia shifts the entire rotation completely, slotting in at #1 for almost every contending team. There will be other starters available, but only one Sabathia.

As for win-that-ring value, I think the difference between C.C. and Johan is much smaller than is generally perceived. Johan essentially insisted that he be overpaid in order to get the deal done. Ignoring the vesting/rotation option year, he got a $124.25 extension for five seasons, and that is insane. MORP has him at $93 million, so you could make the case that Santana and his contract net out to a $31 million liability — that may sound crazy, but doesn’t that basically explain why they didn’t get more for the guy? And just to give an example of the various scenarios that get weighted into that value, there is a reasonable chance that he misses around a full season on the DL, and now you’re paying him $31 million per for four healthy seasons.

Of course there is cost of acquisition to consider, because a player like this is scarce, but they paid a fair price for that. But was the value of his acquisition really driven by, or enhanced by, his 2009-2013 seasons, in which they would be required to overpay him?

Consider this: Given the choice, would the Mets have rather just paid him the $13 million for 2008 and negotiate at the end of the season, or given him this deal? I think, given who they gave up and their own finances, they’d have taken the one-year deal without hesitation. I think only the Yankees prefer to take the long-term deal, since they’re hypothetically giving up Phil Hughes and can afford it. For every other team, you have to assume that you can get a better deal — or avoid a worse one — by waiting a year later, and even if he wins another Cy Young, you can probably still be the top bidder at or near the same dollars.

So the upshot of this is, I don’t think acquiring Santana, given the requirements, was really that much more attractive than acquiring Sabathia, with no requirements, and possibly it was actually less attractive. Either way, though, we benefit from a vastly expanded market of potential trade partners.