In Which The New York Media Ticks Me Off

Remember the interminable months of Santana trade rumors and more rumors? I certainly do. What I remember very distinctly, too, is how the New York media outlets devoted hours of coverage to one idea: that while Johan Santana is good, very good, and perhaps the very best in baseball, is he really that much better than someone we already have?

The answer, Minnesota fans already know, is: OF COURSE HE IS.

When his stats, both traditional and sabremetric, are lined up in front of your eyes, it's hard not to get queasy thinking of the way Bill Smith and all of Twins Territory got fleeced by the trade. Sure, Philip Humber is having an okay spring, and Carlos Gomez is showing the speed he was supposed to have. But we should have gotten more, so much more for him.

So while I'm usually not one to complain about coastal bias, I'm pretty well ticked off. Because after all those months of "Is Johan Santana Really That Good?", the New York Times devotes 1,240 words on Santana's change-up. 1,240 slobbery, reverent words on the evolution and wonderment that is one pitch.

I guess now that all really is said and done, this fan can only say: Carlos Gomez better be fast.