PDA

View Full Version : Josh Johnson



SpiritofVodkaDave
10-08-2012, 08:12 AM
Has been mentioned that the Marlins will most likely trade him this off-season and the Twins would be interested. He is owed 13.75 million this year and is a free agent after the season (would be a Type A most likely)

I think he is worth trying to get assuming we don't have to give up one of Hicks, Sano, Arcia, Gibson or Rosario. Wonder if they would be interested in Ben Revere+prospects

Johnson in the rotation instantly gives the team an ace, and if they could sign another decent FA or even Scott Baker you could be looking at a rotation of:
Johnson, Baker, Diamond, Gibson, Hendriks.

Not to shabby.

Brock Beauchamp
10-08-2012, 08:41 AM
I'd push hard for a Shields for Span swap before going after Johnson. Given the current state of the Twins, I'm not crazy about the idea of giving up a prospect for one year of a starter.

SpiritofVodkaDave
10-08-2012, 09:22 AM
I'd push hard for a Shields for Span swap before going after Johnson. Given the current state of the Twins, I'm not crazy about the idea of giving up a prospect for one year of a starter.

Well obviously I'd prefer Shields, but the asking price for Shields is going to be significantly higher then Johnson. The nice thing about Johnson is you could get him without having to give up two of your top prospects, and you also would have a whole year to work out an extension with him. Maybe he would be willing to do a tiny hometown discount?

Trade for him and offer him a 4 year 70 million dollar extension?

It would be a good time to "buy" on Johnson as his value isn't as high as it was pre injury, but the guy has legit ace stuff. I'd rather give up a couple prospects or players and give him 70 million rather then compete in free agency for an "ace" like Grienke or whatnot.

Brock Beauchamp
10-08-2012, 09:25 AM
If he's open to an extension, I'd be far more open to the acquisition. I completely forgot that he's a Minnesota native.

James
10-08-2012, 09:57 AM
I like the idea if he's open to an extension. Even though 2012 was a down year for him, his numbers were still pretty good. It's probably as close to buying low as you can get for a guy like him.

I didn't have time to type out all his numbers, but everyone here should know how to get to baseball reference anyway.

Boom Boom
10-08-2012, 09:58 AM
I'd push hard for a Shields for Span swap before going after Johnson. Given the current state of the Twins, I'm not crazy about the idea of giving up a prospect for one year of a starter.

It's going to take more than Span to get Shields.

Winston Smith
10-08-2012, 09:59 AM
Can't really think he'd be cheap probably at least 2 of our top 10 prospects or more. Giving up multiple top prospects with the chance he walks after the season is not a typical TR type deal.
I think he moved away when he was very young but he could give us a discount like Mauer did!
I still think a deal centered around Span and Shields makes the most sense. Fills a need for them he is from Tampa and it saves them a bunch of money.

Brock Beauchamp
10-08-2012, 10:06 AM
I'd push hard for a Shields for Span swap before going after Johnson. Given the current state of the Twins, I'm not crazy about the idea of giving up a prospect for one year of a starter.

It's going to take more than Span to get Shields.

It shouldn't take much more and if it does, pass. Tampa Bay would get three years of Span for approximately the same money that the Twins would get Shields for two years. Outside of a great 2011, Shields is not an "ace" by any stretch of the imagination. He's good but not great. I don't know why forum posters are so high on the guy... He's basically a healthy Scott Baker that strikes out half a guy more every nine innings.

J-Dog Dungan
10-08-2012, 10:22 AM
I'd push hard for a Shields for Span swap before going after Johnson. Given the current state of the Twins, I'm not crazy about the idea of giving up a prospect for one year of a starter.

It's going to take more than Span to get Shields.

It shouldn't take much more and if it does, pass. Tampa Bay would get three years of Span for approximately the same money that the Twins would get Shields for two years. Outside of a great 2011, Shields is not an "ace" by any stretch of the imagination. He's good but not great. I don't know why forum posters are so high on the guy... He's basically a healthy Scott Baker that strikes out half a guy more every nine innings.
It would probably take Span, and maybe a couple throw-in pitchers that the Rays will somehow be able to make more productive (like Swarzak and Duensing?). If they ask for Span and a top prospect, then gods no. Yeah, a healthy Scott Baker who strikes out those half a batter more in "the toughest division in the AL."

Boom Boom
10-08-2012, 10:32 AM
I'd push hard for a Shields for Span swap before going after Johnson. Given the current state of the Twins, I'm not crazy about the idea of giving up a prospect for one year of a starter.

It's going to take more than Span to get Shields.

It shouldn't take much more and if it does, pass. Tampa Bay would get three years of Span for approximately the same money that the Twins would get Shields for two years. Outside of a great 2011, Shields is not an "ace" by any stretch of the imagination. He's good but not great. I don't know why forum posters are so high on the guy... He's basically a healthy Scott Baker that strikes out half a guy more every nine innings.


So, he's Scott Baker, except significantly better than Scott Baker?

Do you think other teams would be willing to give up more than Span to get Shields? Because if they would, there's no reason for the Rays to trade Shields for Span and maybe a throw-in.

Shields has an option on his contract for $12 million in 2014, and it's not out of the realm of possibility that whichever team has him at that point would gladly pick that option up. Span likely won't ever earn more than $10 million in a season. Point is, starting pitching is more valuable on the market than outfielders.

mike wants wins
10-08-2012, 10:52 AM
I would roll the die on Johnson. Given his health and salary, it should take Revere or something like that to get him, something I would do with Hicks and Arcia available.

Brock Beauchamp
10-08-2012, 10:54 AM
So, he's Scott Baker, except significantly better than Scott Baker?

Do you think other teams would be willing to give up more than Span to get Shields? Because if they would, there's no reason for the Rays to trade Shields for Span and maybe a throw-in.

Shields has an option on his contract for $12 million in 2014, and it's not out of the realm of possibility that whichever team has him at that point would gladly pick that option up. Span likely won't ever earn more than $10 million in a season. Point is, starting pitching is more valuable on the market than outfielders.

That's just it... He's not better than Baker. Look at their ERA+, WHIP, BB/9, K/9, etc. They're basically the same pitcher with a little variance here and there. Shields is healthier. That's the difference. It's a pretty big difference but that's why Baker is going to get ~$3m this season while Shields is going to get over $20m over the next two.

Like I said, the Rays would get three years of Span for the same money as two years of Shields. both have an option for their last season. Is Shields so much more valuable than Span that he's worth significantly more than that three-for-two-years swap? I don't think so and the numbers agree with me.

twinscowboysbulls
10-08-2012, 10:55 AM
The goal this offseason has to be to improve the starting rotation. If we can add a Shields or Josh Johnson type pitcher without selling absoluting everything, then we have to do it. If we have to give up Span to get him then so be it. I honestly think Hicks might be ready to take over in CF by mid season next year. Revere could handle things in CF until then.

If we could get Shields or Johnson and then add someone like Edwin Jackson, we would be looking pretty decent SP-wise. I'm guessing Morneau could be traded this offseason if the Twins want to free up some payroll for SP.

Winston Smith
10-08-2012, 10:55 AM
No reason to compare him to Baker. Baker is coming off TJ surgery, no way to tell if he will be any good after that, some are some aren't. He likely won't be back (starting) until May or June and he isn't under contract unless you pick up the option.
Baker is a non factor until he proves he can pitch again and he is signed.
Shields would likely be a top 5 starter in the Central. Besides Verlander and Sales who is better?

Brock Beauchamp
10-08-2012, 10:57 AM
No reason to compare him to Baker. Baker is coming off TJ surgery, no way to tell if he will be any good after that, some are some aren't. He likely won't be back (starting) until May or June and he isn't under contract unless you pick up the option.
Baker is a non factor until he proves he can pitch again and he is signed.
Shields would likely be a top 5 starter in the Central. Besides Verlander and Sales who is better?

My point with the Baker comp is not to compare 2012 Baker versus 2012 Shields. It's to compare how both pitchers have actually performed over the course of their careers. People seem to take the attitude that Shields is a number one pitcher but often say Baker is nothing more than a number three. Reality doesn't jibe with that evaluation. Both pitchers (when healthy) are nearly identical. And they both have ceilings somewhere in the "very good number two pitcher" range with the average year coming in at "decent number two pitcher".

Off the top of my head, I'd take Scherzer before Shields, no question.

old nurse
10-08-2012, 11:10 AM
I'd push hard for a Shields for Span swap before going after Johnson. Given the current state of the Twins, I'm not crazy about the idea of giving up a prospect for one year of a starter.

It's going to take more than Span to get Shields.


It shouldn't take much more and if it does, pass. Tampa Bay would get three years of Span for approximately the same money that the Twins would get Shields for two years. Outside of a great 2011, Shields is not an "ace" by any stretch of the imagination. He's good but not great. I don't know why forum posters are so high on the guy... He's basically a healthy Scott Baker that strikes out half a guy more every nine innings.


So, he's Scott Baker, except significantly better than Scott Baker?

Do you think other teams would be willing to give up more than Span to get Shields? Because if they would, there's no reason for the Rays to trade Shields for Span and maybe a throw-in.

Shields has an option on his contract for $12 million in 2014, and it's not out of the realm of possibility that whichever team has him at that point would gladly pick that option up. Span likely won't ever earn more than $10 million in a season. Point is, starting pitching is more valuable on the market than outfielders.


Considering Tampa's dreadful offense, if they were not going to trade pitching to make a playoff run they were so close to last season, why would they now? What they value Shields as would be a high value that Brock would disagree with. More than likely what the Rays want, the Twins did not have then. It would be more like Arcia and Benson with a good pitching prospect then a Span. Look at their trading history.
A decent prospect with a few low A guys could get you a Johnson. I do not know if the Twins would do that kind of trade.

SpiritofVodkaDave
10-08-2012, 11:26 AM
I'd push hard for a Shields for Span swap before going after Johnson. Given the current state of the Twins, I'm not crazy about the idea of giving up a prospect for one year of a starter.

It's going to take more than Span to get Shields.

It shouldn't take much more and if it does, pass. Tampa Bay would get three years of Span for approximately the same money that the Twins would get Shields for two years. Outside of a great 2011, Shields is not an "ace" by any stretch of the imagination. He's good but not great. I don't know why forum posters are so high on the guy... He's basically a healthy Scott Baker that strikes out half a guy more every nine innings.
It would probably take Span, and maybe a couple throw-in pitchers that the Rays will somehow be able to make more productive (like Swarzak and Duensing?). If they ask for Span and a top prospect, then gods no. Yeah, a healthy Scott Baker who strikes out those half a batter more in "the toughest division in the AL."
Swarzak and Duensing have zero trade value. It would take Span+ a top prospect at least. Top of rotation starters who have more than one year left cost an arm and a leg. (unless you are the Twins and give up Garza for Delmon)

SpiritofVodkaDave
10-08-2012, 11:27 AM
So, he's Scott Baker, except significantly better than Scott Baker?

Do you think other teams would be willing to give up more than Span to get Shields? Because if they would, there's no reason for the Rays to trade Shields for Span and maybe a throw-in.

Shields has an option on his contract for $12 million in 2014, and it's not out of the realm of possibility that whichever team has him at that point would gladly pick that option up. Span likely won't ever earn more than $10 million in a season. Point is, starting pitching is more valuable on the market than outfielders.

That's just it... He's not better than Baker. Look at their ERA+, WHIP, BB/9, K/9, etc. They're basically the same pitcher with a little variance here and there. Shields is healthier. That's the difference. It's a pretty big difference but that's why Baker is going to get ~$3m this season while Shields is going to get over $20m over the next two.

Like I said, the Rays would get three years of Span for the same money as two years of Shields. both have an option for their last season. Is Shields so much more valuable than Span that he's worth significantly more than that three-for-two-years swap? I don't think so and the numbers agree with me.
Shields also pitches against the AL East, Baker pitched against the AL Central. Huge difference.

SpiritofVodkaDave
10-08-2012, 11:29 AM
Can't really think he'd be cheap probably at least 2 of our top 10 prospects or more. Giving up multiple top prospects with the chance he walks after the season is not a typical TR type deal.
I think he moved away when he was very young but he could give us a discount like Mauer did!
I still think a deal centered around Span and Shields makes the most sense. Fills a need for them he is from Tampa and it saves them a bunch of money.
I would give up two of our top 10 prospects for him. (No Hicks, Sano, Arcia, Buxton, Gibson) Rosario would be tough to part with, but would gladly give him up for a legitimate Ace.

Nick Nelson
10-08-2012, 11:32 AM
People seem to take the attitude that Shields is a number one pitcher but often say Baker is nothing more than a number three. Reality doesn't jibe with that evaluation. Both pitchers (when healthy) are nearly identical.
Here's the thing: his ability to stay healthy is what MAKES Shields a borderline No. 1. The guy hasn't missed a start in six years. Teams value that kind of reliability very highly. You may be right that he's not likely to be an upper-echelon ace in terms of production (though over the last two years he basically has been) but I suspect he's exactly what the Twins are looking for in a guy who could lead their unstable rotation.

mk
10-08-2012, 11:39 AM
I would roll the die on Johnson. Given his health and salary, it should take Revere or something like that to get him, something I would do with Hicks and Arcia available.

If the Twins could get Shields for Span and Johnson for Revere plus a couple low prospects, do both deals and let Mastroianni handle CF until Hicks is ready.

Brock Beauchamp
10-08-2012, 11:43 AM
People seem to take the attitude that Shields is a number one pitcher but often say Baker is nothing more than a number three. Reality doesn't jibe with that evaluation. Both pitchers (when healthy) are nearly identical.
Here's the thing: his ability to stay healthy is what MAKES Shields a borderline No. 1. The guy hasn't missed a start in six years. Teams value that kind of reliability very highly. You may be right that he's not likely to be an upper-echelon ace in terms of production (though over the last two years he basically has been) but I suspect he's exactly what the Twins are looking for in a guy who could lead their unstable rotation.

He was an upper echelon guy in 2011. This season, he's a decent pitcher, nothing more. In 2010, he was pretty bad. The only years he's been way above average are 2008 and 2011. His durability is certainly an asset and I noted that in an earlier post but if we're talking about pure production, he's not an ace and the Twins shouldn't be considering giving up too many assets to get the guy. If the Rays are willing to talk reasonably about a trade, I'm all for it but the Span+Parmelee+Prospect is too much for a guy who probably won't pitch much better than his $11m contract pays him.

If the Twins are going to pay a guy $11m a year for two years, why shouldn't they simply go get an Edwin Jackson for that kind of money and keep Span & Co? It's a bad baseball decision to give up that much for a guy who is paid that much when there are similar FA options out there for the same kind of money.

Boom Boom
10-08-2012, 12:22 PM
I don't think we're really disagreeing necessarily. I just think the Rays could get a better offer for Shields than Span.

The Rays are constantly looking to unload payroll and trading Shields for Span doesn't really accomplish that. I think they'd be more likely to take Hicks for Shields straight up than Span for Shields.

Also, I don't think Ben Revere has much trade value at all.

AllhopeisgoneMNTWINS
10-08-2012, 12:26 PM
I would roll the die on Johnson. Given his health and salary, it should take Revere or something like that to get him, something I would do with Hicks and Arcia available.

If the Twins could get Shields for Span and Johnson for Revere plus a couple low prospects, do both deals and let Mastroianni handle CF until Hicks is ready.

Really? I can see maybe Span and a mid level prospect for Shields. But Revere for Johnson? First of all the Marlins need pitching just as bad as we do. Why would they give up their ACE? Seems like a lot of people on here are under the belief that when you throw a quarter in a wishing well their dreams will come true. Well hey everyone....WE ARE NOT GETTING JOSH JOHNSON. Shields is a possibility but i cant see that either. they have Desmond Jennings groomed for center field, Zobrist who can play left or right, and Matt Joyce as well.

Brock Beauchamp
10-08-2012, 12:30 PM
Also, I don't think Ben Revere has much trade value at all.

Agreed. I think his value is almost nothing at this point. If he had continued with a .300+ avg and .340 OBP, his value would be quite a bit higher but he tailed off significantly at the end of the season (as some of us predicted he would).

J-Dog Dungan
10-08-2012, 12:54 PM
I would roll the die on Johnson. Given his health and salary, it should take Revere or something like that to get him, something I would do with Hicks and Arcia available.

If the Twins could get Shields for Span and Johnson for Revere plus a couple low prospects, do both deals and let Mastroianni handle CF until Hicks is ready.

Really? I can see maybe Span and a mid level prospect for Shields. But Revere for Johnson? First of all the Marlins need pitching just as bad as we do. Why would they give up their ACE? Seems like a lot of people on here are under the belief that when you throw a quarter in a wishing well their dreams will come true. Well hey everyone....WE ARE NOT GETTING JOSH JOHNSON. Shields is a possibility but i cant see that either. they have Desmond Jennings groomed for center field, Zobrist who can play left or right, and Matt Joyce as well.

They (the Marlins) might need pitching as bad as we do, but if they see a chance to improve their team (ala Johan Santana except actually getting valued prospects), then 8.5/10 you take the deal. If we give them (the Rays) Span, they can put Jennings on the bench, where his stats really say he should belong if a Denard Span came along, not to mention the defensive stability going from B.J. Upton to a guy like Span.

Willihammer
10-08-2012, 01:00 PM
The first challenge is trying to understand the Marlins' motives. I dont' follow the Marlins closely but from here it looks like their owner(s) are awfully impulsive and may be less than hardcore baseball fans. Who's to say they wouldn't deal a Johnson or Buehrle just as a salary dump?

AllhopeisgoneMNTWINS
10-08-2012, 01:04 PM
I would roll the die on Johnson. Given his health and salary, it should take Revere or something like that to get him, something I would do with Hicks and Arcia available.

If the Twins could get Shields for Span and Johnson for Revere plus a couple low prospects, do both deals and let Mastroianni handle CF until Hicks is ready.

Really? I can see maybe Span and a mid level prospect for Shields. But Revere for Johnson? First of all the Marlins need pitching just as bad as we do. Why would they give up their ACE? Seems like a lot of people on here are under the belief that when you throw a quarter in a wishing well their dreams will come true. Well hey everyone....WE ARE NOT GETTING JOSH JOHNSON. Shields is a possibility but i cant see that either. they have Desmond Jennings groomed for center field, Zobrist who can play left or right, and Matt Joyce as well.

They (the Marlins) might need pitching as bad as we do, but if they see a chance to improve their team (ala Johan Santana except actually getting valued prospects), then 8.5/10 you take the deal. If we give them (the Rays) Span, they can put Jennings on the bench, where his stats really say he should belong if a Denard Span came along, not to mention the defensive stability going from B.J. Upton to a guy like Span.

How do you improve your team by trading your ACE for Ben Revere? That doesnt make to much sense. Maybe they would take a trade Such as Revere and Arcia and another mid level prospect for Josh Johnson. Dont get me wrong I like Revere, but there is no way the Marlins sell low on Johnson, there team will not be improved by moving their ACE for a 3rd/4th OF. So one bad year from Jennings you think the Rays will give up on him? I dont believe that is so. Just last year he was regarded as a top prospect in the game.

mike wants wins
10-08-2012, 01:16 PM
The Marlins are not building for next year. They have already indicated they will be cutting payroll probably. I think Johnson will be traded to someone.

AllhopeisgoneMNTWINS
10-08-2012, 01:19 PM
The Marlins are not building for next year. They have already indicated they will be cutting payroll probably. I think Johnson will be traded to someone.

This i do agree with. Just wont be with the Twins.

SpantheMan
10-08-2012, 01:37 PM
The only way they should trade for Johnson is if he agrees to assign an extension as soon as the trade happens. They should not be trading prospects for one year rentals when they've lost 90 games two years in a row.

SpantheMan
10-08-2012, 01:40 PM
Has anyone thought about how trading for these players will affect the Twins payroll? TR has said he has some flexibility, but I'm not sure the management would be ok with adding too much payroll after back to back 90 loss campaigns.

Brock Beauchamp
10-08-2012, 01:42 PM
Has anyone thought about how trading for these players will affect the Twins payroll? TR has said he has some flexibility, but I'm not sure the management would be ok with adding too much payroll after back to back 90 loss campaigns.

If ownership has even the smallest amount of foresight, they'll realize that nothing kills attendance faster than 90 loss teams.

That doesn't mean the Pohlads won't slash payroll but it does mean that it would be the stupidest thing they could do in this situation. They spent ten years building up fan goodwill and building attendance slowly over that time period and to crush that in two years by slashing payroll and churning out bad baseball teams would be absolutely idiotic.

old nurse
10-08-2012, 01:48 PM
As neither Johnson or Shields have long term contracts, you would only trade for them if you thought by adding them you would be contending next year. The Twins are a long way from contending unless you believe that Diamond is for real, Gibson and Baker can put in a full season., and Hendricks can be solid. You can wait out Gibson and Baker if you believe that Deduno and DeVries can hold down the spot short term. I don't think you can be that optimistic. IMO Span is the only player the Twins have that you could call established that they can trade for some pitching. In the long term, the Twins would be better off trading him to a team that has some pitching depth for a B+ pitching prospect or two. Trading for Shields or Johnson is a bandaid at best. The Twins need more than a bandaid.

old nurse
10-08-2012, 01:56 PM
Has anyone thought about how trading for these players will affect the Twins payroll? TR has said he has some flexibility, but I'm not sure the management would be ok with adding too much payroll after back to back 90 loss campaigns.

If ownership has even the smallest amount of foresight, they'll realize that nothing kills attendance faster than 90 loss teams.

That doesn't mean the Pohlads won't slash payroll but it does mean that it would be the stupidest thing they could do in this situation. They spent ten years building up fan goodwill and building attendance slowly over that time period and to crush that in two years by slashing payroll and churning out bad baseball teams would be absolutely idiotic.

The payroll that could be added from the revenue of the new stadium was taken up largely by the contracts of Morneau and Mauer. At that time the Morneau contract really was a no brainer considering his production. Who could foresee the knee to the brain? The Pohlads did not take the loss of value out of the team's pocket and as such the team has suffered.

Boom Boom
10-08-2012, 02:00 PM
As neither Johnson or Shields have long term contracts, you would only trade for them if you thought by adding them you would be contending next year. The Twins are a long way from contending unless you believe that Diamond is for real, Gibson and Baker can put in a full season., and Hendricks can be solid. You can wait out Gibson and Baker if you believe that Deduno and DeVries can hold down the spot short term. I don't think you can be that optimistic. IMO Span is the only player the Twins have that you could call established that they can trade for some pitching. In the long term, the Twins would be better off trading him to a team that has some pitching depth for a B+ pitching prospect or two. Trading for Shields or Johnson is a bandaid at best. The Twins need more than a bandaid.

All very very true.

I do think that Span will be traded, but I think the Twins would be better off sniping an AA or AAA pitcher for him than one who's already established. That is, if they can identify a guy who is ready to take the next step.

SpiritofVodkaDave
10-08-2012, 02:58 PM
The Marlins are not building for next year. They have already indicated they will be cutting payroll probably. I think Johnson will be traded to someone.
Yeah, mlbtraderumors said the same. I imagine they might try to work out an extension with him (do they have the funds to do so?) and if that fails they will trade him prior to the season.

Marlins are in complete rebuilding mode at this point.

SpiritofVodkaDave
10-08-2012, 02:59 PM
As neither Johnson or Shields have long term contracts, you would only trade for them if you thought by adding them you would be contending next year. The Twins are a long way from contending unless you believe that Diamond is for real, Gibson and Baker can put in a full season., and Hendricks can be solid. You can wait out Gibson and Baker if you believe that Deduno and DeVries can hold down the spot short term. I don't think you can be that optimistic. IMO Span is the only player the Twins have that you could call established that they can trade for some pitching. In the long term, the Twins would be better off trading him to a team that has some pitching depth for a B+ pitching prospect or two. Trading for Shields or Johnson is a bandaid at best. The Twins need more than a bandaid.
Or you could trade for them with the intention to lock them up long term. It really is the best option as the Twins don't have an "ace" in the system, and they don't have the capabilities to trade for some young stud pitcher.

StormJH1
10-08-2012, 03:14 PM
As neither Johnson or Shields have long term contracts, you would only trade for them if you thought by adding them you would be contending next year. The Twins are a long way from contending unless you believe that Diamond is for real, Gibson and Baker can put in a full season., and Hendricks can be solid. You can wait out Gibson and Baker if you believe that Deduno and DeVries can hold down the spot short term. I don't think you can be that optimistic. IMO Span is the only player the Twins have that you could call established that they can trade for some pitching. In the long term, the Twins would be better off trading him to a team that has some pitching depth for a B+ pitching prospect or two. Trading for Shields or Johnson is a bandaid at best. The Twins need more than a bandaid.

Pursuant to the "Rule of Zach Parise", Josh Johnson will obviously force a trade to his hometown team, and coerce another pending FA to join him!

Agree with your take though, even if the "rental player" status (plus the fact that the Marlins get destroyed in virtually every trade they make) keeps the price down, why would you do that if you're the Twins? Payroll's going down, not up, and even for one year, that would be hard to swallow, given the fact that we arguably need 3 OK starters more than we need one good one.

As much as guys like Joe Saunders kind of suck, you could stitch together an argument that it would make a bigger difference in the win/loss column adding 3 serviceable guys like that, versus one upper-end guy (like Grienke or even Sanchez) and then having to fill out two other spots with Cole DeVries, Blackburn, or another random AAA starter because you're out of money. Plus, those guys won't sign here, and we won't offer enough years to get them.

beckmt
10-08-2012, 03:19 PM
I would take Josh Johnson only with an extension argeement in place. Believe his price would be lower than Shields. Better bet is to trade Parmalee to Tampa Bay for one of their AAA or major league bullpen. I would inquire on the price for Shields, but believe Tampa would want at least one of the Twins top prospects and that does not solve any problems.
Second note, believe payroll number will still be in the 90-1100 milllion range so some FA signings are possible (Steven Drew anyone)

SpiritofVodkaDave
10-08-2012, 03:21 PM
Payroll's going down, not up, and even for one year, that would be hard to swallow, given the fact that we arguably need 3 OK starters more than we need one good one.

As much as guys like Joe Saunders kind of suck, you could stitch together an argument that it would make a bigger difference in the win/loss
Johnson is due 13.75 million, and he isn't a "good" pitcher he is an ace. You argue you would rather have 3 good pitchers instead of Johnson, please let me know which 3 pitchers you are going to get for $13 million.

Joe Saunders does suck, I want nothing to do with a Joe Saunders on this staff.

Lastly, as I mentioned, you trade for Johnson and try to sign him to a 4 year extension while his value isn't at his peak. Perhaps he would be willing to give a bit of a discount (not a ton) to come back to Minnesota. Absolute worst case scenario is that he walks at the end of the year and you end up with draft pick compensation.

My ideal beginning to the off-season:
Trade Span for some high upside pitching in the minors. (Or if you can get a nice SS like Andrus or something, think about that as well, even though Andrus isn't getting any cheaper...)
Trade Rosario+ C prospect or two for Josh Johnson.
Sign Johnson to 4 year, 70-75 million extension.
Sign Scott Baker to 1 year, 3 mil base (3 more million in incentives)

Starting rotation:
Johnson
Baker
Diamond
Gibson
Hendriks

At this point the Twins would still have quite a bit more money to play with. (+13.75 mil to Johnson, +3 mil to Baker, -4.75 mil Span, -3 mil Nishi) heading into the off-season the Twins were looking at the very minimum of 20 million to spend, more then likely 25+ million. At this point you would still have at least another 10-11 million to spend if you want to bring in another "good" SP or find some INF help.

JP3700
10-08-2012, 03:28 PM
People seem to take the attitude that Shields is a number one pitcher but often say Baker is nothing more than a number three. Reality doesn't jibe with that evaluation. Both pitchers (when healthy) are nearly identical.
Here's the thing: his ability to stay healthy is what MAKES Shields a borderline No. 1. The guy hasn't missed a start in six years. Teams value that kind of reliability very highly. You may be right that he's not likely to be an upper-echelon ace in terms of production (though over the last two years he basically has been) but I suspect he's exactly what the Twins are looking for in a guy who could lead their unstable rotation.

I just wanted to say great post Nick and I completely agree. Verlander and Sabathia are probably the two most prototypical aces I can think of. Sure they have great stuff, but the thing that makes them great and allows them to be thought of so highly is the fact that they make every start and go deep into every game they have the ball. Comparing a "healthy Scott Baker" to James Shields is like saying a "healthy Kerry Wood" is comparable to Roger Clemens. Most great pitchers say that the most important stat at the end of a season is IP.. Not ERA, SO or any other sabermetric stat. Can't go wrong with 6 straight seasons with 200 IP.. He also got his team to the 6th inning in every start in 2012.

Sorry went off the topic a little, but as far as Josh Johnson.. He would be a great fit as well.. Why not go after both he and Shields? Only problem I see is they don't really have a need in the OF.. They have Stanton, Bonifacio, Ruggiano and Morrison. Their need is more in corner IF and young starting pitching. So maybe Parmelee, Plouffe or Hendriks might interest them.. So maybe a package with 1 of the 3 and a couple of mid level prospects.

CharacterGroove
10-08-2012, 03:42 PM
I would trade Span/Revere and a prospect for Johnson even if the chance of getting him to sign an extension is slim to none.

The Twins need to stop the bleeding. And I don't think they're that far off. The devil's in the details, of course, (which prospect) but with its core group the Twins have to play for 2013.

Worst case scenario, other than Johnson getting injured, is that the team sucks again and Ryan turns around and deals Johnson before the deadline. But at least in that case there's an effort to compete.

Brock Beauchamp
10-08-2012, 05:05 PM
I would trade Span/Revere and a prospect for Johnson even if the chance of getting him to sign an extension is slim to none.

The problem is that if you trade the farm for one year of Josh Johnson, you haven't stopped the bleeding. You've simply postponed it for one season, after which you'll be worse off than you were before that point.

notoriousgod71
10-08-2012, 05:51 PM
Trade for them both. Who cares if we deal Span and/or Revere? There are comparable players that players that can replace them. Parmelee? Plouffe? Rosario? Meh.

Starting pitching is the most import part of a team so even if the offense is garbage we're still better off than we are now. I would not trade Sano, Hicks, or Arcia but everyone else is expendable.

AllhopeisgoneMNTWINS
10-08-2012, 06:03 PM
I would trade Span/Revere and a prospect for Johnson even if the chance of getting him to sign an extension is slim to none.

The problem is that if you trade the farm for one year of Josh Johnson, you haven't stopped the bleeding. You've simply postponed it for one season, after which you'll be worse off than you were before that point.

100% Agree with this. Do we really think the twins will be a contender next year with Josh Johnson? This team has many holes. More than likely Johnson will not give the Twins a discount just because he is from here when it comes to an extension. He will be looking for that big paycheck like most other MLB Players. Not all MLB players have loyalty like Joe Mauer.

biggentleben
10-08-2012, 06:04 PM
Think what was given up for Josh Beckett. Expect that much of a return. Hanley was part of that deal as was Anibal Sanchez. I'd not be surprised if one of the top 2-3 prospects would absolutely have to be involved to come to the table.

Brock Beauchamp
10-08-2012, 06:09 PM
I would trade Span/Revere and a prospect for Johnson even if the chance of getting him to sign an extension is slim to none.

The problem is that if you trade the farm for one year of Josh Johnson, you haven't stopped the bleeding. You've simply postponed it for one season, after which you'll be worse off than you were before that point.

100% Agree with this. Do we really think the twins will be a contender next year with Josh Johnson? This team has many holes. More than likely Johnson will not give the Twins a discount just because he is from here when it comes to an extension. He will be looking for that big paycheck like most other MLB Players. Not all MLB players have loyalty like Joe Mauer.

If he's willing to take a hometown discount, talk to him next November. With Morneau's salary coming off the books, the Twins will have the money for Johnson.

Fire Dan Gladden
10-08-2012, 06:11 PM
Make a run at every available pitcher out there. Get one or two on your terms. Josh Johnson would be a nice fit, but I would prefer Shields if I had to choose. Work on him to sign an extension. Short term fixes are fine, but you can't destroy the payroll or the farm system to do it. That is why you see the Carroll/Doumit type signings, instead of huge dollar investments.

I would be willing to move one of the big name prospects if it means having a staff ace for the next 5-7 years.

clutterheart
10-08-2012, 06:27 PM
It would take a very high quality prospect to land Shields. Johnson might be cheaper but they would a player like Hicks not Revere

JP3700
10-08-2012, 06:37 PM
I agree with the posts of acquiring Josh only if he agrees to an extension, not as a rental. I also agree that he wouldn't fix the problem, so if we were to go for him, he can't be the only piece we add, we have to really go for it. Just a thought but what if..
- Trade Hendriks & Plouffe for Johnson and sign to a 3 year extension with a 4th year option in addition to 2013
- Trade Span for Tommy Hanson who has 3 years of club control left
- Re sign Baker to an incentive laden deal with club option(s)
- Sign Jeff Keppinger as the everyday third baseman 2-3 years to bridge to Sano

Lineup of:
Revere CF
Keppinger 3B
Mauer C
Willingham LF
Morneau 1B
Doumit DH
Parmelee RF
? 2B
? SS

Mastroianni off the bench as a defensive replacement and pinch runner. Carroll playing 3-4 days a week in the utility role.

Pitching:
Johnson, Baker, Diamond and Hanson in the rotation with Duensing, Burton and Perkins at the back end of the bullpen.

Sounds like a competitive team to me and would be in the low 90M budget if we fill the roster with minimum salaries. Arcia and Hicks hopefully being ready by 2014 where another 20M coming off the books with Morneau, Blackburn and Carroll. Parm moves to 1B and Arcia or Hicks takes over in RF. I'm not a GM so who knows if this is all possible but it sure is fun to think about :)

AllhopeisgoneMNTWINS
10-08-2012, 06:48 PM
I agree with the posts of acquiring Josh only if he agrees to an extension, not as a rental. I also agree that he wouldn't fix the problem, so if we were to go for him, he can't be the only piece we add, we have to really go for it. Just a thought but what if..
- Trade Hendriks & Plouffe for Johnson and sign to a 3 year extension with a 4th year option in addition to 2013
- Trade Span for Tommy Hanson who has 3 years of club control left
- Re sign Baker to an incentive laden deal with club option(s)
- Sign Jeff Keppinger as the everyday third baseman 2-3 years to bridge to Sano

Lineup of:
Revere CF
Keppinger 3B
Mauer C
Willingham LF
Morneau 1B
Doumit DH
Parmelee RF
? 2B
? SS

Mastroianni off the bench as a defensive replacement and pinch runner. Carroll playing 3-4 days a week in the utility role.

Pitching:
Johnson, Baker, Diamond and Hanson in the rotation with Duensing, Burton and Perkins at the back end of the bullpen.

Sounds like a competitive team to me and would be in the low 90M budget if we fill the roster with minimum salaries. Arcia and Hicks hopefully being ready by 2014 where another 20M coming off the books with Morneau, Blackburn and Carroll. Parm moves to 1B and Arcia or Hicks takes over in RF. I'm not a GM so who knows if this is all possible but it sure is fun to think about :)

Ha this makes me excited to play some MLB the show! The offseason is an exciting time for hopes and predictions in video games and reality. :)

mnfireman
10-08-2012, 07:06 PM
Dreamers, dreamers, dreamers. If trades were that easy and GM's were that agreeable to get screwed, maybe these trades would happen. Span or Revere plus prospects might land one of Johnson, Shields or Hanson, not 2 or all 3. Plouffe, Parmalee, etc... lands minor league prospects at best. This year the team needs to go after FA's or risk another losing season or emptying the minors to land a frontline starter who will have no one to play behind him.

diehardtwinsfan
10-08-2012, 07:11 PM
I wouldn't mind either Johnson or Shields. Johnson shoudl be cheaper and is the type of guy I could see them going after. If the Marlins want a decent prospect though, they are going to have to eat a bad contract (like say Blackburn)...

PseudoSABR
10-08-2012, 07:33 PM
Josh Johnson is precisely the kind of player the Twins should target in Gardy's lame duck year, given his JJ's one year contract. I'd certainly start discussion on extension with Johnson in the offseason if he acquired, but he'd be a valuable trade asset at the deadline, along with Willingham and Morneau if the team struggles. I'm not sure the Marlins would want major league level talent, and their asking price might be too high in the offseason--given that JJ could increase his trade value and be cheaper at the deadline. Personally, I'd be willing to overpay to get the guy this offseason, just because of the flexibility the Twins would have whether they win or lose.

JP3700
10-08-2012, 08:18 PM
Dreamers, dreamers, dreamers. If trades were that easy and GM's were that agreeable to get screwed, maybe these trades would happen. Span or Revere plus prospects might land one of Johnson, Shields or Hanson, not 2 or all 3. Plouffe, Parmalee, etc... lands minor league prospects at best. This year the team needs to go after FA's or risk another losing season or emptying the minors to land a frontline starter who will have no one to play behind him.

Who's getting screwed in the trades I mentioned? If anything in a Hanson for Span swap the Braves would have to add to the trade. As far as a Josh Johnson trade, you mention a Span or Revere plus prospects trade and don't realize they have zero need for outfielders. 2 of their 3 best prospects are outfielders and they have 4 players on their ML team that are capable as well. They don't have a 3B and want young starting pitching to add to Turner and Eovaldi. Plouffe and Hendriks fits what they're looking for, have good upside and have plenty of team control left. Seems like a fair trade to me given their current needs.

biggentleben
10-08-2012, 09:16 PM
The first challenge is trying to understand the Marlins' motives. I dont' follow the Marlins closely but from here it looks like their owner(s) are awfully impulsive and may be less than hardcore baseball fans. Who's to say they wouldn't deal a Johnson or Buehrle just as a salary dump?

They didn't salary dump in 2012. They traded for big prospect hauls. You can criticize not getting a particular top prospect in their deals, but they did get a good haul in each deal, and they'll be looking for top prospects in any deal they do.

gilesferrell
10-08-2012, 09:24 PM
Having Johnson would be nice, but would the Twins really give up some prospects to get him? As much as putting a winning MLB team on the field is needed, they need to keep stocking up the farm system. I would think a Span for Shields trade is more likely because there would be fewer, if not any, prospects involved.

jorgenswest
10-08-2012, 09:57 PM
These two performed among the top 25 pitchers last year.

Pitchers the caliber of Johnson and Shields return top 50 prospects. That's Sano territory.

TheLeviathan
10-08-2012, 10:28 PM
given that JJ could increase his trade value and be cheaper at the deadline. Personally, I'd be willing to overpay to get the guy this offseason, just because of the flexibility the Twins would have whether they win or lose.

Given his health history, it's equally likely he has no value at the deadline.

SpiritofVodkaDave
10-09-2012, 12:46 AM
given that JJ could increase his trade value and be cheaper at the deadline. Personally, I'd be willing to overpay to get the guy this offseason, just because of the flexibility the Twins would have whether they win or lose.

Given his health history, it's equally likely he has no value at the deadline.
Equally as likely? Give me a god damn break. Does he have the potential to get injured? Sure, but not let's act like it is some forgone conclusion or anything even close to that:

Observe:

2009: 207 IP
2010: 183.2 IP
2011:60.1 IP
2012:191.1 P

SpiritofVodkaDave
10-09-2012, 12:50 AM
These two performed among the top 25 pitchers last year.

Pitchers the caliber of Johnson and Shields return top 50 prospects. That's Sano territory.

no Sano is top 20 territory. A guy like Rosario is top 50 territory, also as recent history has shown us, teams are much less likely to trade top prospect these days.

Though Shields will command at least 2 very good prospects, Johnson may be a bit cheaper prospect wise.

PseudoSABR
10-09-2012, 12:53 AM
given that JJ could increase his trade value and be cheaper at the deadline. Personally, I'd be willing to overpay to get the guy this offseason, just because of the flexibility the Twins would have whether they win or lose.

Given his health history, it's equally likely he has no value at the deadline.You're right there is injury risk, but maybe some due diligence would go along way to tipping the scales. (In any case, JJ has pitched at least 180IP three of four seasons*). In theory, it's a risk I'm willing to take given the payroll coming off the books, and the boom/bust nature of 2013. Again, I'd hold off trying to resign the guy until midseason or even offseason 2013.

*Dave beat me to the point /hattip

old nurse
10-09-2012, 07:55 AM
given that JJ could increase his trade value and be cheaper at the deadline. Personally, I'd be willing to overpay to get the guy this offseason, just because of the flexibility the Twins would have whether they win or lose.

Given his health history, it's equally likely he has no value at the deadline.
Equally as likely? Give me a god damn break. Does he have the potential to get injured? Sure, but not let's act like it is some forgone conclusion or anything even close to that:

Observe:

2009: 207 IP
2010: 183.2 IP
2011:60.1 IP
2012:191.1 P

Is JJ not getting all of his starts per year or is he a less than 6 innings a game pitcher? 32-34 starts a year should get the pitcher 220 innings?

SpiritofVodkaDave
10-09-2012, 08:17 AM
given that JJ could increase his trade value and be cheaper at the deadline. Personally, I'd be willing to overpay to get the guy this offseason, just because of the flexibility the Twins would have whether they win or lose.

Given his health history, it's equally likely he has no value at the deadline.
Equally as likely? Give me a god damn break. Does he have the potential to get injured? Sure, but not let's act like it is some forgone conclusion or anything even close to that:

Observe:

2009: 207 IP
2010: 183.2 IP
2011:60.1 IP
2012:191.1 P

Is JJ not getting all of his starts per year or is he a less than 6 innings a game pitcher? 32-34 starts a year should get the pitcher 220 innings?

2010 he had 28 starts and 31 this year.

Brandon
10-09-2012, 08:58 AM
I'll go with the trade for shields. though I have no idea what it would take to get him. fun to speculate....Span, Rosario, and Burton maybe
sign Joe Blanton to 2 year 18 million with 3rd year option and Baker to a 1 year 3-4 million with some incentives 1-3 million maybe and with a 1 year 8-10 option. Thats just over 20 million to fix the rotation. And the options give the Twins flexibilty to either save money on production or end the relationship before losses mount. These moves have the potential to help keep the rotation stable for the next 2-3 years.

Shields
Blanton
Baker
Diamond
Hendricks, Gibson, Deduno, and Devries and I guess Blackburn gets a glance in spring training too.

Thats a solid rotation with depth in case of injury or ineffectiveness.

Erock
10-09-2012, 09:24 AM
3 years of an above average lead-off hitter/good fielding CF, a top 100 prospect, and an incredibly cheap set-up man for 2 years of a good #2 starter sounds like a terrible idea to me.

old nurse
10-09-2012, 10:20 AM
given that JJ could increase his trade value and be cheaper at the deadline. Personally, I'd be willing to overpay to get the guy this offseason, just because of the flexibility the Twins would have whether they win or lose.

Given his health history, it's equally likely he has no value at the deadline.
Equally as likely? Give me a god damn break. Does he have the potential to get injured? Sure, but not let's act like it is some forgone conclusion or anything even close to that:

Observe:

2009: 207 IP
2010: 183.2 IP
2011:60.1 IP
2012:191.1 P

Is JJ not getting all of his starts per year or is he a less than 6 innings a game pitcher? 32-34 starts a year should get the pitcher 220 innings?

2010 he had 28 starts and 31 this year.

You say he is an ace yet expect that he will sigh for number two money at a less than ideal contract length and money for him. You expect the Marlins to trade for him for a low level high ceiling prospect and throw ins. For the money that would still be about 15% of the payroll you would need a spot starter and a pitcher to get you through the seventh along with your set up man and closer. That sounds like a trade that will not happen, a signing that will not happen and a need for a very good bullpen.

SpiritofVodkaDave
10-09-2012, 11:06 AM
given that JJ could increase his trade value and be cheaper at the deadline. Personally, I'd be willing to overpay to get the guy this offseason, just because of the flexibility the Twins would have whether they win or lose.

Given his health history, it's equally likely he has no value at the deadline.
Equally as likely? Give me a god damn break. Does he have the potential to get injured? Sure, but not let's act like it is some forgone conclusion or anything even close to that:

Observe:

2009: 207 IP
2010: 183.2 IP
2011:60.1 IP
2012:191.1 P

Is JJ not getting all of his starts per year or is he a less than 6 innings a game pitcher? 32-34 starts a year should get the pitcher 220 innings?

2010 he had 28 starts and 31 this year.

You say he is an ace yet expect that he will sigh for number two money at a less than ideal contract length and money for him. You expect the Marlins to trade for him for a low level high ceiling prospect and throw ins. For the money that would still be about 15% of the payroll you would need a spot starter and a pitcher to get you through the seventh along with your set up man and closer. That sounds like a trade that will not happen, a signing that will not happen and a need for a very good bullpen.
He has Ace potential, but his injury issues (which sort of limits his true max dollar potential)

I'm not sure why he wouldn't think about taking a 4 year 75 mil extension, heck, even if you have to up it to 5/90 I think the Twins should do it. The guys getting 100 mil deals are the ones who have stayed healthy over the past 3-4 years.

He did make it 7+ IP in 13 of his starts last year, obviously you would want more than that but some of that could be him shaking off rust (he struggled early out of the gate)

The Marlins would trade him for a prospect package, look at what Greinke and other top pitchers brought back recently, teams aren't willing to give up a ton to get pitchers on one year contracts these days, Rosario is a top 50 prospect, and you can add in a couple other prospects as well (someone in the 8-10 range and someone in the 15-20 range) The Marlins would definitely consider pulling the trigger on that.

biggentleben
10-09-2012, 11:08 AM
You say he is an ace yet expect that he will sigh for number two money at a less than ideal contract length and money for him. You expect the Marlins to trade for him for a low level high ceiling prospect and throw ins. For the money that would still be about 15% of the payroll you would need a spot starter and a pitcher to get you through the seventh along with your set up man and closer. That sounds like a trade that will not happen, a signing that will not happen and a need for a very good bullpen.

Exactly. Like I said earlier, it took Hanley to get Josh Beckett moved. I would almost guarantee it takes Sano to get Johnson moved. The Marlins had huge reported offers this summer and didn't move him, so I doubt they'll move him without a big return.

mike wants wins
10-09-2012, 11:39 AM
The twins are flush with outfielders, what do you expect to get in return for one of them that would be better than a number 2 starter? And how many number 2 starters are even on the planet? These decisions are not just about the specific people in one deal, but also what you have int the org.

Heinie Manush
10-09-2012, 11:40 AM
[ Point is, starting pitching is more valuable on the market than outfielders.[/QUOTE]

What we need is a GM that would trade us a quality starting pitcher (and perhaps a solid shortstop) for a corner outfielder. But, alas, no such GM could ever exist...

Shane Wahl
10-09-2012, 11:46 AM
The Trade Rosario crowd better stick around until 2015 to see if he is a MLB second baseman . . . if so . . . yikes, the Twins would have made yet another decisively stupid decision regarding their middle infield.

Anyway, Shields for Span, Swarzak, and Hermsen might get it done. And if you are willing to trade Span, then you should be willing to add those other two as well.

Revere is tradeable, but only if you are talking about adding a Berrios and Summers in there as well.

Brock Beauchamp
10-09-2012, 11:57 AM
The Twins can't trade away middle infielders with the potential to be better than replacement level. God knows we only see those guys about once every 15 years.

SpiritofVodkaDave
10-09-2012, 12:01 PM
Exactly. Like I said earlier, it took Hanley to get Josh Beckett moved. I would almost guarantee it takes Sano to get Johnson moved. The Marlins had huge reported offers this summer and didn't move him, so I doubt they'll move him without a big return.

That trade was several years ago, the way teams trade prospects has changed quite a bit, just look at the Grienke etc moves.

SpiritofVodkaDave
10-09-2012, 12:02 PM
The Trade Rosario crowd better stick around until 2015 to see if he is a MLB second baseman . . . if so . . . yikes, the Twins would have made yet another decisively stupid decision regarding their middle infield.

Anyway, Shields for Span, Swarzak, and Hermsen might get it done. And if you are willing to trade Span, then you should be willing to add those other two as well.

Revere is tradeable, but only if you are talking about adding a Berrios and Summers in there as well.

Swarzak. Has. No. Value.

AllhopeisgoneMNTWINS
10-09-2012, 01:07 PM
These two performed among the top 25 pitchers last year.

Pitchers the caliber of Johnson and Shields return top 50 prospects. That's Sano territory.

Thats what im saying. People on this board are like we can just give them Revere and Hendriks for Josh Johnson< That makes me laugh. The Marlins in no way will sell low on this guy. Odds are they will want some young stud pitcher in the minors in return....we dont have that. Shields would require Span and a top prospect.

notoriousgod71
10-09-2012, 01:31 PM
You say he is an ace yet expect that he will sigh for number two money at a less than ideal contract length and money for him. You expect the Marlins to trade for him for a low level high ceiling prospect and throw ins. For the money that would still be about 15% of the payroll you would need a spot starter and a pitcher to get you through the seventh along with your set up man and closer. That sounds like a trade that will not happen, a signing that will not happen and a need for a very good bullpen.

Exactly. Like I said earlier, it took Hanley to get Josh Beckett moved. I would almost guarantee it takes Sano to get Johnson moved. The Marlins had huge reported offers this summer and didn't move him, so I doubt they'll move him without a big return.

It took Gomez and Humber to get Johan...

SpiritofVodkaDave
10-09-2012, 02:05 PM
You say he is an ace yet expect that he will sigh for number two money at a less than ideal contract length and money for him. You expect the Marlins to trade for him for a low level high ceiling prospect and throw ins. For the money that would still be about 15% of the payroll you would need a spot starter and a pitcher to get you through the seventh along with your set up man and closer. That sounds like a trade that will not happen, a signing that will not happen and a need for a very good bullpen.

Exactly. Like I said earlier, it took Hanley to get Josh Beckett moved. I would almost guarantee it takes Sano to get Johnson moved. The Marlins had huge reported offers this summer and didn't move him, so I doubt they'll move him without a big return.

It took Gomez and Humber to get Johan...
DING DING DING! And Johan had a long term contract in place before they accepted the trade AND Johan was the best pitcher in all of baseball.

AllhopeisgoneMNTWINS
10-09-2012, 02:08 PM
You say he is an ace yet expect that he will sigh for number two money at a less than ideal contract length and money for him. You expect the Marlins to trade for him for a low level high ceiling prospect and throw ins. For the money that would still be about 15% of the payroll you would need a spot starter and a pitcher to get you through the seventh along with your set up man and closer. That sounds like a trade that will not happen, a signing that will not happen and a need for a very good bullpen.

Dont remind me....only the twins....

Exactly. Like I said earlier, it took Hanley to get Josh Beckett moved. I would almost guarantee it takes Sano to get Johnson moved. The Marlins had huge reported offers this summer and didn't move him, so I doubt they'll move him without a big return.

It took Gomez and Humber to get Johan...

dont remind me...only the twins....

SpiritofVodkaDave
10-09-2012, 02:16 PM
You say he is an ace yet expect that he will sigh for number two money at a less than ideal contract length and money for him. You expect the Marlins to trade for him for a low level high ceiling prospect and throw ins. For the money that would still be about 15% of the payroll you would need a spot starter and a pitcher to get you through the seventh along with your set up man and closer. That sounds like a trade that will not happen, a signing that will not happen and a need for a very good bullpen.

Dont remind me....only the twins....

Exactly. Like I said earlier, it took Hanley to get Josh Beckett moved. I would almost guarantee it takes Sano to get Johnson moved. The Marlins had huge reported offers this summer and didn't move him, so I doubt they'll move him without a big return.

It took Gomez and Humber to get Johan...

dont remind me...only the twins....

You act like Gomez is the only prospect to never work out, anyone remember the centerpiece of that Sabathia deal? LaPorta...think the Brewers are missing him so much?

CharacterGroove
10-09-2012, 02:26 PM
I would trade Span/Revere and a prospect for Johnson even if the chance of getting him to sign an extension is slim to none.

The problem is that if you trade the farm for one year of Josh Johnson, you haven't stopped the bleeding. You've simply postponed it for one season, after which you'll be worse off than you were before that point.

Well, that doesn't make sense to me. By stopping the bleading I mean fielding a competitive club in 2013. I believe Johnson furthers that effort more than Span/Revere (and Prospect X). By 2014 I don't expect the cupboard to be bare.

But who X is matters to me. No Sano, Buxton, Barrios, etc. I don't want to mortgage the future for one year. But of course it's going to take one or more good players to get Johnson - or any worthwhile starter in a trade.

Again, the devil's in the details, but you don't play this game to have the best team 2-3 years down the road on paper. You play to win championships. This year taught us we've got a decent foundation with horrible starting pitching. Let's do something about it.

PseudoSABR
10-09-2012, 02:50 PM
It took Gomez and Humber to get Johan...
DING DING DING! And Johan had a long term contract in place before they accepted the trade AND Johan was the best pitcher in all of baseball.The Twins also had little leverage because of Johan's no trade clause. The Mets were bidding against themselves. I'm not sure that JJ has the same kind of leverage that Johan had, so I'm not sure that the Marlins will be forced to take a mediocre package.

biggentleben
10-09-2012, 03:58 PM
Exactly. Like I said earlier, it took Hanley to get Josh Beckett moved. I would almost guarantee it takes Sano to get Johnson moved. The Marlins had huge reported offers this summer and didn't move him, so I doubt they'll move him without a big return.

That trade was several years ago, the way teams trade prospects has changed quite a bit, just look at the Grienke etc moves.

Yep, and they were still asking for similar return to move Johnson this summer. Some teams have changed, others have not...

biggentleben
10-09-2012, 04:05 PM
You say he is an ace yet expect that he will sigh for number two money at a less than ideal contract length and money for him. You expect the Marlins to trade for him for a low level high ceiling prospect and throw ins. For the money that would still be about 15% of the payroll you would need a spot starter and a pitcher to get you through the seventh along with your set up man and closer. That sounds like a trade that will not happen, a signing that will not happen and a need for a very good bullpen.

Exactly. Like I said earlier, it took Hanley to get Josh Beckett moved. I would almost guarantee it takes Sano to get Johnson moved. The Marlins had huge reported offers this summer and didn't move him, so I doubt they'll move him without a big return.

It took Gomez and Humber to get Johan...
DING DING DING! And Johan had a long term contract in place before they accepted the trade AND Johan was the best pitcher in all of baseball.

2 prospects in BA's top 52, yet another in the top 100, and another in the Mets top 10 for Baseball America. Yep, not valuable prospects at all!

old nurse
10-09-2012, 05:10 PM
You say he is an ace yet expect that he will sigh for number two money at a less than ideal contract length and money for him. You expect the Marlins to trade for him for a low level high ceiling prospect and throw ins. For the money that would still be about 15% of the payroll you would need a spot starter and a pitcher to get you through the seventh along with your set up man and closer. That sounds like a trade that will not happen, a signing that will not happen and a need for a very good bullpen.

Exactly. Like I said earlier, it took Hanley to get Josh Beckett moved. I would almost guarantee it takes Sano to get Johnson moved. The Marlins had huge reported offers this summer and didn't move him, so I doubt they'll move him without a big return.

It took Gomez and Humber to get Johan...
DING DING DING! And Johan had a long term contract in place before they accepted the trade AND Johan was the best pitcher in all of baseball.

2 prospects in BA's top 52, yet another in the top 100, and another in the Mets top 10 for Baseball America. Yep, not valuable prospects at all!

Gotta love Dave for his persistence. In the Grienke and Sanchez deals it took multiple AA pitchers as well as a near major league ready prospect to get the deals done. I don't think Hirschfield, Darnell and or Hermsen is exactly going to cause teams to drool.

SpiritofVodkaDave
10-09-2012, 05:13 PM
You say he is an ace yet expect that he will sigh for number two money at a less than ideal contract length and money for him. You expect the Marlins to trade for him for a low level high ceiling prospect and throw ins. For the money that would still be about 15% of the payroll you would need a spot starter and a pitcher to get you through the seventh along with your set up man and closer. That sounds like a trade that will not happen, a signing that will not happen and a need for a very good bullpen.

Exactly. Like I said earlier, it took Hanley to get Josh Beckett moved. I would almost guarantee it takes Sano to get Johnson moved. The Marlins had huge reported offers this summer and didn't move him, so I doubt they'll move him without a big return.

It took Gomez and Humber to get Johan...
DING DING DING! And Johan had a long term contract in place before they accepted the trade AND Johan was the best pitcher in all of baseball.

2 prospects in BA's top 52, yet another in the top 100, and another in the Mets top 10 for Baseball America. Yep, not valuable prospects at all!

Johan was also the best pitcher in the game and was basically coming off 3 straight Cy Young seasons, the Mets had a contract in place with him. I like Johnson, but he is nowhere near that caliber, so one can assume it won't take 2 top 50 and 1 top 100. 1 top 50 (Rosario) along with a guy in the top ten of the twins prospects along with a C+ prospect should be enough to get it done.

Of course the Marlins were asking a high price this season, they had no reason not to (just like the Twins did with Span/Willingham/Morneau) that doesn't mean the price doesn't come down, especially heading into a walk season.

SpiritofVodkaDave
10-09-2012, 05:17 PM
It doesn't matter that the two pitchers they got were in AA, they just weren't very good prospects (no where near the top 100 and IIRC one wasn't even in the Angels top ten, which was a weak ass system anyways), Segura was a nice prospect (#55) right where Rosario will most likely be!

So again, Rosario+one top ten prospect in system+C/C+ prospect is basically the exact same package the Cardinals gave up.

If the Marlins are ONLY looking for pitching back then yeah, we are prob in trouble, but nothing has been said of their demands as of yet, you gotta look at it as a value standpoint not a "Well X team traded two AA pitchers for Y player" every team is different.

AllhopeisgoneMNTWINS
10-09-2012, 05:41 PM
Who knows what the Marlins want, their team is in shambles right now, im pretty sure they could use a bit of everything. So if you look at it, if they go with a complete rebuilding project they will probably want some high end prospects both pitchers and hitters. Like you said if they want pitchers we are not getting Johnson, but if they do want a hitter we got plenty of hitting prospects to spare. IF we do trade for Johnson...there better be an extension that comes along with it.

TheLeviathan
10-09-2012, 07:46 PM
Equally as likely? Give me a god damn break. Does he have the potential to get injured? Sure, but not let's act like it is some forgone conclusion or anything even close to that:

First off - what the hell with the attitude? Considering some of the ridiculous notions you're floating around here I wouldn't suggest throwing stones Mr. Glass House. Second - Pseudo was claiming we could get equal of better value for him at the deadline as we can in the offseason. Given this is already a questionable premise, I'd say that, yes, it is just as like that something would go wrong and he'd be less valuable than what we dealt before the season.

If you don't want to settle on just the injury risk - how about the career ERA a run higher on the road? The transition from the NL to the AL?

Lesser Dali
10-09-2012, 08:45 PM
Does "Spirit of Vodka Dave" have a no trade clause? He seems to be a clubhouse chemistry detriment. What can Twins Daily get for him?

old nurse
10-09-2012, 09:29 PM
Did this spin out of control or what? I am sorry for trying to disprove everything Dave said on for trading for Josh Johnson. Perhaps I need a spirit of some sort like Vodka to make sense of Dave's fascination with a pitcher that does not have a track record of pitching 200 innings a year, much less 7 innings a game. His rental price for one year would be one of the few people plating middle infield in the system with a high upside. Every trade for starting pitching has given up potential starters at a high level. I give up.

BBWriterMan
10-09-2012, 10:37 PM
I like Josh Johnson as a trade target for the Twins, even with the questions of his injury history and what the Marlins would want in return. Someone else may have mentioned elsewhere in this thread, but I think he has one year left on his deal at a fairly significant salary? ($10-plus million?). That alone may be enough to make the Twins hesitant to seriously consider a trade for him.

PseudoSABR
10-09-2012, 11:14 PM
Clearly we need to cap the embedded quoting thing, or use a different graphical mechanism, because this thread is unreadable.

That said, I wonder if Oakland would look to move this Anderson fellow.

PseudoSABR
10-09-2012, 11:16 PM
Did this spin out of control or what? I am sorry for trying to disprove everything Dave said on for trading for Josh Johnson. Perhaps I need a spirit of some sort like Vodka to make sense of Dave's fascination with a pitcher that does not have a track record of pitching 200 innings a year, much less 7 innings a game. His rental price for one year would be one of the few people plating middle infield in the system with a high upside. Every trade for starting pitching has given up potential starters at a high level. I give up.Look, it depends on price, something everyone agrees on. And you're drawing an arbitrary and disingenuous line with the 200 innings, as has been mentioned JJ was in 10% of that three out of four seasons.

USAFChief
10-10-2012, 12:54 AM
Whether or not it's doable is debatable, but Josh Johnson is exactly the type of pitcher the Twins should be looking to add to their rotation, short and long term.

kab21
10-10-2012, 04:47 AM
Marlins are in complete rebuilding mode at this point.

And the twins aren't?

trading anything significant in the farm system for Johnson is silly. He's pretty much the last pitcher that I would trade something significant for. He's already had TJ. He had a season ending arm injury in 2011. He's missed a few starts in other seasons due to arm issues. Some say that he has bad mechanics. Please avoid.

Shields might not be an ace but he's a workhorse that gives a team a chance to win and he's signed for two years. I'm all about this trade if Span or Willingham can be the centerpiece. If it takes a good prospect then I would probably pass.

Hanson is another interesting target since I like his upside and he has 3 arb years left.

old nurse
10-10-2012, 05:59 AM
If expecting your "Ace" to pitch every 5th day and to go into the 7th inning arbitrary, then 200 inning is an arbitrary number. If you are paying someone 13 or more per year to pitch, I really don't think the expectation is unreasonable.. If your starters can't go but six innings then you start to need 8 people in the bullpen. Do the math.

old nurse
10-10-2012, 06:01 AM
Whether or not it's doable is debatable, but Josh Johnson is exactly the type of pitcher the Twins should be looking to add to their rotation, short and long term.

In ability yes. In cost versus durability no. See Carl Pavano 2012.

Brandon
10-10-2012, 06:51 AM
I like Johnson but my vote is for Shields over Johnson. Shields may not be as good as Johnson but he will help the bullpen be more effective by pitching deeper into games and getting them more rest once every 5 days.

Brock Beauchamp
10-10-2012, 07:40 AM
Guys, we've talked about truncating your posts. We don't find it amusing that some of you are intentionally making the forum more difficult to read.

SpiritofVodkaDave
10-10-2012, 08:29 AM
Guys, we've talked about truncating your posts. We don't find it amusing that some of you are intentionally making the forum more difficult to read.

I don't think anyone is doing it intentionally, just automatically cap it at 3 levels or whatever.

SpiritofVodkaDave
10-10-2012, 08:31 AM
I like Johnson but my vote is for Shields over Johnson. Shields may not be as good as Johnson but he will help the bullpen be more effective by pitching deeper into games and getting them more rest once every 5 days.

Again, I would rather have Shields then Johnson, the reason I am advocating Johnson is because the price will be significantly cheaper. We aren't getting Shields for Span, that deal makes zero sense for the Rays. Span could potentially be a part of it, but it will be Span+ significant prospect(s). Ditto with Hanson.

SpiritofVodkaDave
10-10-2012, 08:38 AM
Did this spin out of control or what? I am sorry for trying to disprove everything Dave said on for trading for Josh Johnson. Perhaps I need a spirit of some sort like Vodka to make sense of Dave's fascination with a pitcher that does not have a track record of pitching 200 innings a year, much less 7 innings a game. His rental price for one year would be one of the few people plating middle infield in the system with a high upside. Every trade for starting pitching has given up potential starters at a high level. I give up.
He was coming off a major arm injury this year, it wasn't exactly shocking that he didn't reach 200 IP, however you act like he is only starting 20 games a year for 120 IP, he has come pretty close to 200 IP (or even more) in his last 3 healthy years. (3 of the past 4 years)

Also, I never have once advocated just picking him up from one year, if you would go back and read I have said they should trade for him and work out a contract extension. If he doesn't want to do the contract extension then I would pull Rosario from the deal and the deal would probably fall apart.

Yes, sometimes it sucks giving up prospects, but I would gladly trade a guy like Rosario for 5 years of an ace like pitcher in Josh Johnson, we complain that we haven't had a legit MI in a long time, well we haven't exactly had a lot of aces in the past 20 years as well, I can only count one (Johan) unless you want to claim Liriano was an "ace" for that half year before he got injured.

The reason I bring up Rosario is because you would be trading him at his high point as a prospect, it still isn't a 100% that he is even able to stick at 2B and he still has several steps to go.

As far as the "need high level pitching in return" that really is irrelevant because we don't know what the Marlins want in return. The two main pieces the Twins got back for Santana were a low level pitcher in Guerra and a CF. Humber and Mulvey were both "higher level" but both projected to be #5's even at the time, I'm sure if the Marlins really wanted a guy like that they could pry loose someone from the Twins organization.

ericchri
10-10-2012, 08:42 AM
Why would you want to trade Eddie Rosario to get him? A high-rated prospect who plays middle infield, and he's the one you want to trade? Really? If you're building a trade around one of our top prospects you go with Arcia or Hicks. We need to clear outfielders from our system, and those guys are higher rated players than Rosario (plus closer to big-league ready), so maybe you get a little more back in return or have to throw in less of the down-level prospects as a result.

A healthy Josh Johnson signed to an extension would be awesome, and worth prospects to do it. Josh Johnson with only one year left on his contract is a tough call, and I'm not sure I'd want to offer up a lot. They need pitching for next year badly, though, or attendance is going to plummet.

How does the free agent thing work now? If he was on our roster before the season started, we would then be eligible for the extra pick if he left as a free agent? But we would have to offer him arbitration also, to be eligible for that pick?

SpiritofVodkaDave
10-10-2012, 08:42 AM
Marlins are in complete rebuilding mode at this point.

And the twins aren't?

The Marlins are going to go through a complete rebuilding effort, all indications are the Twins will not, otherwise why bring back Gardy/Anderson for one more year?

Also keep in mind, Marlins fans are apathetic no matter what, if the Twins want to keep butts in the seats at Target Field they realize they need to turn things around sooner then later.

I'm not saying gut the entire farm system for a win now campaign, but this team needs top of the rotation pitching now and moving forward. There are three ways to get that.
1. Overspend in free agency- Probably not the best idea, since you will also often times lose a draft pick and end up bidding against Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers, Angels etc.
2. Draft/Bring up through your system- Other then Berrios the Twins don't have a true "ace" or "ace-lite" pitcher in the minors at this point, and he is at least 3-4 years away. I like Gibson as a #2 but you need more than that, everyone else projects as a#3-#5.
3. Trade for one- A guy like Shields I still maintain is going to cost significantly more then Johnson and more then the Twins will want to give up. So trading Rosario sucks, but if you can get 4-5 years of Josh Johnson back for it I think you have to consider making that move, otherwise the Twins will literally go into 2013 with a #3 type pitcher as their ace.

Brock Beauchamp
10-10-2012, 08:48 AM
Guys, we've talked about truncating your posts. We don't find it amusing that some of you are intentionally making the forum more difficult to read.

I don't think anyone is doing it intentionally, just automatically cap it at 3 levels or whatever.

I'd have to go write a plug-in to cap embedded quotes. If there was a setting to do it, I would have done it long ago. Either people can monitor their own posts or we can go back to one quote per post. Those are the options.

SpiritofVodkaDave
10-10-2012, 08:53 AM
Guys, we've talked about truncating your posts. We don't find it amusing that some of you are intentionally making the forum more difficult to read.

I don't think anyone is doing it intentionally, just automatically cap it at 3 levels or whatever.

I'd have to go write a plug-in to cap embedded quotes. If there was a setting to do it, I would have done it long ago. Either people can monitor their own posts or we can go back to one quote per post. Those are the options.
well...better get to work :)

Just FYI: it's near impossible to delete the quotes on an iphone/ipad, its not as cumbersome on a computer but still a pain.

SpiritofVodkaDave
10-10-2012, 08:58 AM
Why would you want to trade Eddie Rosario to get him? A high-rated prospect who plays middle infield, and he's the one you want to trade? Really? If you're building a trade around one of our top prospects you go with Arcia or Hicks. We need to clear outfielders from our system, and those guys are higher rated players than Rosario (plus closer to big-league ready), so maybe you get a little more back in return or have to throw in less of the down-level prospects as a result.

A healthy Josh Johnson signed to an extension would be awesome, and worth prospects to do it. Josh Johnson with only one year left on his contract is a tough call, and I'm not sure I'd want to offer up a lot. They need pitching for next year badly, though, or attendance is going to plummet.

How does the free agent thing work now? If he was on our roster before the season started, we would then be eligible for the extra pick if he left as a free agent? But we would have to offer him arbitration also, to be eligible for that pick?

I understand your point about Hicks/Arcia, but I disagree, to me both of those guys have much higher upsides then Rosario, Arcia with his bat and Hicks all around. I know we are all giddy about Rosario being the solution at 2B, but he is still far away from the majors and it still isn't written in stone that he will stick to 2B, wasn't it said that one of the reasons why they moved him from the OF is that they weren't sure his bat would play out there? That is a bit of a warning sign, no? I get not wanting to trade a guy who has potential at MI, but keep in mind we do have a few other decent MI prospects these days as well in Goodrum and Levi Michael (Dozier still has a bit of potenital as well IMO) All this to say basically, I would gladly give up Rosario before any of Arcia/Hicks etc.

I'm pretty sure that if Johnson was on our roster opening day he would be eligible for the extra pick, I think it only applies to players traded in season, but I could be wrong.

Keep in mind, there is no reason why they couldn't discuss an extension with him prior to the trade going through, if they can't get it done before the trade they can at least get a good sense of what it would cost and get it done prior to the season.

snepp
10-10-2012, 09:20 AM
3 is probably 1 too many.

USAFChief
10-10-2012, 01:12 PM
Pig: go back to one quoted post in a reply. Please.

AllhopeisgoneMNTWINS
10-10-2012, 01:20 PM
Clearly we need to cap the embedded quoting thing, or use a different graphical mechanism, because this thread is unreadable.

That said, I wonder if Oakland would look to move this Anderson fellow.

It sure would be nice to get him. Billy Beane and Crew know there stuff when it comes to getting prospects in return for anything they trade. So Im guessing it would take more than what would be required to get Johnson or Shields.

biggentleben
10-10-2012, 06:05 PM
How does the free agent thing work now? If he was on our roster before the season started, we would then be eligible for the extra pick if he left as a free agent? But we would have to offer him arbitration also, to be eligible for that pick?

He needs to be on the team as of opening day to be eligible, and you would need to offer him a qualifying offer, which is very different from arbitration. A qualifying offer level will be determined each season, but it's based on an average of the top 125 salaries for the previous season. For 2012, at the last time it was updated (early August by Buster Olney), it was going to take a $13.3M offer for one season for a qualifying offer. If the player accepts that, you pay them that amount for the next year or negotiate a longer term deal. If they reject that, then the team will be eligible for a compensatory draft pick. If the team does not make an offer up to the qualifying level or the player accepts the qualifying offer, there is no compensatory pick. If Johnson is hurt in 2013, it is highly doubtful he would get an estimated $13.7M after 2013 (current number for after 2013 in Olney's August article), so the Twins would be stuck with him at that number if they even offered that amount to him. So there's a fairly high chance that Josh Johnson would bring you back no picks in 2013, and there's a nonzero chance that Johnson provides you less WAR than Scott Baker (Baker earned 1.1 fWAR more in 2011 in a season where both missed time due to injury).

old nurse
10-10-2012, 08:49 PM
[QUOTE=old nurse;57657]As far as the "need high level pitching in return" that really is irrelevant because we don't know what the Marlins want in return. The two main pieces the Twins got back for Santana were a low level pitcher in Guerra and a CF. Humber and Mulvey were both "higher level" but both projected to be #5's even at the time, I'm sure if the Marlins really wanted a guy like that they could pry loose someone from the Twins organization.

Look at every trade made by a team moving a starting pitcher. They get pitching back. The Marlins are going to be different???
In only one year has Johnson ever pitched more than 200 ininngs. Only twice has he made more than 30 starts. For a team like the Twins he is not worth the risk. See Pavano's salary this year. There ought to be better risks out there than Johnson given his probable salary if signed to an extension. It wold be unrealistic to think he would bypass free agency for a contract that was less than what he is making now. I doubt there would be a hometown discount unless the Twins were playing at All Sports Stadium

SpiritofVodkaDave
10-11-2012, 12:39 AM
How does the free agent thing work now? If he was on our roster before the season started, we would then be eligible for the extra pick if he left as a free agent? But we would have to offer him arbitration also, to be eligible for that pick?

He needs to be on the team as of opening day to be eligible, and you would need to offer him a qualifying offer, which is very different from arbitration. A qualifying offer level will be determined each season, but it's based on an average of the top 125 salaries for the previous season. For 2012, at the last time it was updated (early August by Buster Olney), it was going to take a $13.3M offer for one season for a qualifying offer. If the player accepts that, you pay them that amount for the next year or negotiate a longer term deal. If they reject that, then the team will be eligible for a compensatory draft pick. If the team does not make an offer up to the qualifying level or the player accepts the qualifying offer, there is no compensatory pick. If Johnson is hurt in 2013, it is highly doubtful he would get an estimated $13.7M after 2013 (current number for after 2013 in Olney's August article), so the Twins would be stuck with him at that number if they even offered that amount to him. So there's a fairly high chance that Josh Johnson would bring you back no picks in 2013, and there's a nonzero chance that Johnson provides you less WAR than Scott Baker (Baker earned 1.1 fWAR more in 2011 in a season where both missed time due to injury).

Johnson has been "hurt" 1 of the past 4 years. I'm not sure what your point exactly is, by the way, why are you trolling Twins boards anyways? I thought you were a Braves fan?

biggentleben
10-11-2012, 07:48 AM
Johnson has been "hurt" 1 of the past 4 years. I'm not sure what your point exactly is, by the way, why are you trolling Twins boards anyways? I thought you were a Braves fan?

You've been shown your "hurt" comment is incorrect, so that's not worth arguing.

I've been conversing with many on this board back to the days on ESPN, and I'd hardly consider what I do trolling. I also participate in a Mets message board as well, and though they're a rival, I've never once been accused of trolling on their site either. Holding fast to arguments that are continually proven false would be a much closer definition of trolling.

Brock Beauchamp
10-11-2012, 08:16 AM
Johnson has been "hurt" 1 of the past 4 years. I'm not sure what your point exactly is, by the way, why are you trolling Twins boards anyways? I thought you were a Braves fan?

You've been shown your "hurt" comment is incorrect, so that's not worth arguing.

I've been conversing with many on this board back to the days on ESPN, and I'd hardly consider what I do trolling. I also participate in a Mets message board as well, and though they're a rival, I've never once been accused of trolling on their site either. Holding fast to arguments that are continually proven false would be a much closer definition of trolling.

Ur trollface.

SpiritofVodkaDave
10-11-2012, 10:52 AM
Look at every trade made by a team moving a starting pitcher. They get pitching back. The Marlins are going to be different???
In only one year has Johnson ever pitched more than 200 ininngs. Only twice has he made more than 30 starts. For a team like the Twins he is not worth the risk. See Pavano's salary this year. There ought to be better risks out there than Johnson given his probable salary if signed to an extension. It wold be unrealistic to think he would bypass free agency for a contract that was less than what he is making now. I doubt there would be a hometown discount unless the Twins were playing at All Sports Stadium

Then we can give them pitching back if they really want it, its just not going to be the center piece (much like the Greinke trade, Santana trade, Sanchez trade etc)

Also what on earth does Pavano have to do with Johnson?

old nurse
10-11-2012, 11:11 AM
[QUOTE=old nurse;57775]

Also what on earth does Pavano have to do with Johnson?

Johnson has had less than half his seasons in the majors where he has made all of his starts. Call the reason why what you will. Those reasons will likely continue. As Johnson would take a huge chunk of the team's budget the Twins cannot afford the down time. The effect would be disasterous. If you cannot understand that concept look at Pavano. He missed a lot of time through his career. He had one healthy yearwith the Twins and was signed for longer term. With that money tied up in Pavano not pitching what did the Twins have as a replacement? Yes any player can go down with an injury, but why would you want someone with a track record of it? See 2007, 2008 and 2011 for Johnson.

SpiritofVodkaDave
10-11-2012, 11:15 AM
3 of his past 4 seasons. 33, 31, 28 starts. Yes, that is not EVERY start but its not like he is missing huge chunks of time.

There is a huge difference between Johnson and Pavano, for one Johnson actually is able to strike people out and a top of the rotation type guy, Pavano was/is a back end of the rotation type guy.

Also Johnson was "hurt" in 2007/2008 because he was having Tommy John surgery. It's not like he was going on and off the disabled list for various aliments Pavano Yankee style.

biggentleben
10-11-2012, 12:12 PM
Johnson has been "hurt" 1 of the past 4 years. I'm not sure what your point exactly is, by the way, why are you trolling Twins boards anyways? I thought you were a Braves fan?

You've been shown your "hurt" comment is incorrect, so that's not worth arguing.

I've been conversing with many on this board back to the days on ESPN, and I'd hardly consider what I do trolling. I also participate in a Mets message board as well, and though they're a rival, I've never once been accused of trolling on their site either. Holding fast to arguments that are continually proven false would be a much closer definition of trolling.

Ur trollface.

My trollface? ;) I am trollface? Bueller?

Willihammer
10-11-2012, 12:59 PM
Some of these guys who run into shoulder issues after TJ just need to get on and stay on a strength and conditioning program and they are more or less ok. I know JJ was put on a shoulder strength program after he was shut down with shoulder issues in 2011 and came back strong for 2012, although his velocity did dip a little. There is risk there and a high ceiling too. It would be very un Twins like to bring a guy like JJ on board out of free agency but I would be pleasantly surprised if they did.

kab21
10-11-2012, 09:01 PM
The Marlins are going to go through a complete rebuilding effort, all indications are the Twins will not, otherwise why bring back Gardy/Anderson for one more year?

Also keep in mind, Marlins fans are apathetic no matter what, if the Twins want to keep butts in the seats at Target Field they realize they need to turn things around sooner then later.

I'm not saying gut the entire farm system for a win now campaign, but this team needs top of the rotation pitching now and moving forward. There are three ways to get that.
1. Overspend in free agency- Probably not the best idea, since you will also often times lose a draft pick and end up bidding against Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers, Angels etc.
2. Draft/Bring up through your system- Other then Berrios the Twins don't have a true "ace" or "ace-lite" pitcher in the minors at this point, and he is at least 3-4 years away. I like Gibson as a #2 but you need more than that, everyone else projects as a#3-#5.
3. Trade for one- A guy like Shields I still maintain is going to cost significantly more then Johnson and more then the Twins will want to give up. So trading Rosario sucks, but if you can get 4-5 years of Josh Johnson back for it I think you have to consider making that move, otherwise the Twins will literally go into 2013 with a #3 type pitcher as their ace.

You are proposing to do #1 and #3 if you trade for Johnson with a huge extension. The Twins would be better off not giving up prospects and paying a little more for Greinke. Greinke might not be as good as Johnson but he's significantly more durable.

I like how people are quick to say that they knew something was wrong with Baker last year when Johnson typically misses a couple of starts a season and was shut down for most of one season due to arm issues. there is absolutely no way that the Twins should give a guy like Johnson a 4/75+ extension even if they didn't have to give up any prospects.

greengoblinrulz
10-11-2012, 09:13 PM
Only reason that the Twins would be in the bidding for Johnson is cause of his pending FA/arm troubles.
MN has NEVER been one to take a chance like this....so it will be interesting if they enter the bidding.
What will other teams offer up as a gamble for him. If its one high end prospect (Rosario or Arcia for ex) and a mid-tier (Benson or Hermsen) like ANA did for Grienke....its well worth the shot, even if they want a legit MLB player like Span or Revere. It is a HUGE gamble, but this team has never gone 'all in' & management may want to finally take a shot.

kab21
10-11-2012, 10:18 PM
but this team has never gone 'all in' & management may want to finally take a shot.

This makes no sense at all. Why would they choose this year? They have lost 90 games in two consecutive seasons and they need WAY MORE than JJ to be a good team.

The best course of action is not doing anything to screw up the future. Things that will screw up the future is trading good prospects and signing average players to long contracts. For now the team needs to target guys on reasonable 2-3 yr deals like Willingham and it is going to have to take its lumps. Rebuilding awful teams doesn't happen in one offseason.

old nurse
10-12-2012, 12:27 AM
3 of his past 4 seasons. 33, 31, 28 starts. Yes, that is not EVERY start but its not like he is missing huge chunks of time.

There is a huge difference between Johnson and Pavano, for one Johnson actually is able to strike people out and a top of the rotation type guy, Pavano was/is a back end of the rotation type guy.

Also Johnson was "hurt" in 2007/2008 because he was having Tommy John surgery. It's not like he was going on and off the disabled list for various aliments Pavano Yankee style.
The point was the Twins cannot afford to had a player making that kind of money hurt and not playing. Johnnson's career is not about playing a full season. Can I make it any simpler for you. By innings pitched per year with starts per year, Johnson does not rate that kind of money from an organization like the Twins. I won't clutter things up with examples of how this works because it only seems to confuse you.

SpiritofVodkaDave
10-12-2012, 12:48 AM
3 of his past 4 seasons. 33, 31, 28 starts. Yes, that is not EVERY start but its not like he is missing huge chunks of time.

There is a huge difference between Johnson and Pavano, for one Johnson actually is able to strike people out and a top of the rotation type guy, Pavano was/is a back end of the rotation type guy.

Also Johnson was "hurt" in 2007/2008 because he was having Tommy John surgery. It's not like he was going on and off the disabled list for various aliments Pavano Yankee style.
The point was the Twins cannot afford to had a player making that kind of money hurt and not playing. Johnnson's career is not about playing a full season. Can I make it any simpler for you. By innings pitched per year with starts per year, Johnson does not rate that kind of money from an organization like the Twins. I won't clutter things up with examples of how this works because it only seems to confuse you.
Didn't the twins give 184 million a couple year ago to a guy who had "injury issues"?? Also they gave a 3 year contract to Pavano as well, who has had a few injury issues of his own ;)

Also you aren't confusing me at all, champ. Keep trying to make me out to be the simpleton who doesn't understand baseball...it won't end well for ya.

Yes in 2011 he was hurt, but in the 3 years surrounding that he averaged over 190 IP, which actually is quite a bit more then ANY pitcher pitched for our 2012 Twins ;)

old nurse
10-12-2012, 07:54 AM
3 of his past 4 seasons. 33, 31, 28 starts. Yes, that is not EVERY start but its not like he is missing huge chunks of time.

There is a huge difference between Johnson and Pavano, for one Johnson actually is able to strike people out and a top of the rotation type guy, Pavano was/is a back end of the rotation type guy.

Also Johnson was "hurt" in 2007/2008 because he was having Tommy John surgery. It's not like he was going on and off the disabled list for various aliments Pavano Yankee style.
The point was the Twins cannot afford to had a player making that kind of money hurt and not playing. Johnnson's career is not about playing a full season. Can I make it any simpler for you. By innings pitched per year with starts per year, Johnson does not rate that kind of money from an organization like the Twins. I won't clutter things up with examples of how this works because it only seems to confuse you.
Didn't the twins give 184 million a couple year ago to a guy who had "injury issues"?? Also they gave a 3 year contract to Pavano as well, who has had a few injury issues of his Also you aren't confusing me at all, champ. Keep trying to make me out to be the simpleton who doesn't understand baseball...it won't end well for ya.

Yes in 2011 he was hurt, but in the 3 years surrounding that he averaged over 190 IP, which actually is quite a bit more then ANY pitcher pitched for our 2012 Twins ;)

You mention the problems in the Twins contracts with players with injury history and still can't see giving that large of contract?

It won't end well for me? ??? Threatning people?

biggentleben
10-12-2012, 09:42 AM
You mention the problems in the Twins contracts with players with injury history and still can't see giving that large of contract?

It won't end well for me? ??? Threatning people?

Typical Dave decompensation rant. Once proven incorrect and unable to sway just by overly repeating the same incorrect argument, he'll decompensate to cursing and then threatening. Lovely.

SpiritofVodkaDave
10-12-2012, 10:15 AM
You mention the problems in the Twins contracts with players with injury history and still can't see giving that large of contract?

It won't end well for me? ??? Threatning people?

Typical Dave decompensation rant. Once proven incorrect and unable to sway just by overly repeating the same incorrect argument, he'll decompensate to cursing and then threatening. Lovely.

Sigh, you bore me. I wasn't threatening him at all.

SpiritofVodkaDave
10-12-2012, 10:18 AM
3 of his past 4 seasons. 33, 31, 28 starts. Yes, that is not EVERY start but its not like he is missing huge chunks of time.

There is a huge difference between Johnson and Pavano, for one Johnson actually is able to strike people out and a top of the rotation type guy, Pavano was/is a back end of the rotation type guy.

Also Johnson was "hurt" in 2007/2008 because he was having Tommy John surgery. It's not like he was going on and off the disabled list for various aliments Pavano Yankee style.
The point was the Twins cannot afford to had a player making that kind of money hurt and not playing. Johnnson's career is not about playing a full season. Can I make it any simpler for you. By innings pitched per year with starts per year, Johnson does not rate that kind of money from an organization like the Twins. I won't clutter things up with examples of how this works because it only seems to confuse you.
Didn't the twins give 184 million a couple year ago to a guy who had "injury issues"?? Also they gave a 3 year contract to Pavano as well, who has had a few injury issues of his Also you aren't confusing me at all, champ. Keep trying to make me out to be the simpleton who doesn't understand baseball...it won't end well for ya.

Yes in 2011 he was hurt, but in the 3 years surrounding that he averaged over 190 IP, which actually is quite a bit more then ANY pitcher pitched for our 2012 Twins ;)

You mention the problems in the Twins contracts with players with injury history and still can't see giving that large of contract?

It won't end well for me? ??? Threatning people?

I never said that Johnson would be the "typical" Twins signing, in fact he would go against the grain quite a bit, which would actually be a good thing. Give me the high risk high reward signing of Josh Johnson rather then paying close to the same amount for the low risk low reward Shawn Marcum or the like. You were the one who said the Twins wouldn't give out a big contract to a player with injury history, I provided two examples of players they did give multi year deals to that had significant injury histories.

In 3 of the past 4 years he pitched either 200 IP or very close to that, yes, he isn't going to give you every start every year but as long as he gives you 28-30 I would certainly live with that, again give me the high risk, high reward.

old nurse
10-12-2012, 11:59 AM
[/QUOTE] never said that Johnson would be the "typical" Twins signing, in fact he would go against the grain quite a bit, which would actually be a good thing. Give me the high risk high reward signing of Josh Johnson rather then paying close to the same amount for the low risk low reward Shawn Marcum or the like. You were the one who said the Twins wouldn't give out a big contract to a player with injury history, I provided two examples of players they did give multi year deals to that had significant injury histories.

In 3 of the past 4 years he pitched either 200 IP or very close to that, yes, he isn't going to give you every start every year but as long as he gives you 28-30 I would certainly live with that, again give me the high risk, high reward.[/QUOTE]


If Marcum gets Josh Johnson kind of money you would have a point. He won't get that kind of money, so you don't have a point

Linus
10-12-2012, 01:59 PM
The Twins farm system is bereft of starting pitching and middle infielders. The only trades that makes sense are ones where we deal from a position of strength or surplus, which means your only trade options are one of: Span / Revere / Hicks / Arcia or either Morneau / Parmelee. Trading Rosario would be a huge mistake in my book as he is the only legit MI prospect they have (don't even talk about Dozier, et al); they are marginal prospects with little chance of being plus major league players). Worsening holes in your system to plug other holes doesn't solve problems long term. If you can trade two of the above mentioned for long term pitching help (feel free to throw in marginal prospects), we have to make the deal. The likely return will not be a pitcher as good as Johnson or Shields but so long as they they are reliable and reasonably consistent then we have at least fixed one spot in the rotation. Then you still have to spend some money on reasonable 2 FA SP on 3 year deals to bridge the gap to the first class of real pitching prospects in our system. Only way to be competitive next year and still not mortgage the farm for the future.

SpiritofVodkaDave
10-12-2012, 02:31 PM
"If Marcum gets Josh Johnson kind of money you would have a point. He won't get that kind of money, so you don't have a point"

Marcum will get 4 years at close to 13 mil a season this off season. I am advocating grabbing Johnson and paying him 17 million a year in an extension. Yes Johnson would cost more money, but the upside is so much greater and worth it.

Also

USAFChief
10-12-2012, 02:50 PM
This makes no sense at all. Why would they choose this year? They have lost 90 games in two consecutive seasons and they need WAY MORE than JJ to be a good team.

The best course of action is not doing anything to screw up the future. Things that will screw up the future is trading good prospects and signing average players to long contracts. A.

Why wouldnt they choose this year? Needing WAY MORE than JJ doesn't mean you shouldn't start assembling WAY MORE. They're going to need starting pitching, from outside the organization, in 2013 AND 2016. Do you think it's realistic they can just sit around until YOU decide they're good enough to get better, and at that point both the pitchers to acquire and the assets to acquire them will magically step forward?

Sitting back and thinking the moon and stars are going to align in some undefined magical year far off in the future is how you become the KC Royals. You're perpetually trading the present for the future, until one day you wake up and you realize you're 20 years into a 4 year rebuilding plan with nothing to show for it, and you're farther away than you were 20 years ago.

if they can get a Josh Johnson for a reasonable price, including trading some minor league assets, AND sign him to an extension, they absolutely should do so.

SpiritofVodkaDave
10-12-2012, 02:57 PM
This makes no sense at all. Why would they choose this year? They have lost 90 games in two consecutive seasons and they need WAY MORE than JJ to be a good team.

The best course of action is not doing anything to screw up the future. Things that will screw up the future is trading good prospects and signing average players to long contracts. A.

Why wouldnt they choose this year? Needing WAY MORE than JJ doesn't mean you shouldn't start assembling WAY MORE. They're going to need starting pitching, from outside the organization, in 2013 AND 2016. Do you think it's realistic they can just sit around until YOU decide they're good enough to get better, and at that point both the pitchers to acquire and the assets to acquire them will magically step forward?

Sitting back and thinking the moon and stars are going to align in some undefined magical year far off in the future is how you become the KC Royals. You're perpetually trading the present for the future, until one day you wake up and you realize you're 20 years into a 4 year rebuilding plan with nothing to show for it, and you're farther away than you were 20 years ago.

if they can get a Josh Johnson for a reasonable price, including trading some minor league assets, AND sign him to an extension, they absolutely should do so.

I'm digging your ideas these days Chief, now if I could only bring you over to the church of DeRosa...

TheLeviathan
10-12-2012, 04:07 PM
Oh...so getting is an ace is only a matter of trading marginal prospects and convincing them to take less money?

Well damn. Why don't we get five of them? Perhaps we should (dare I say) try this approach with middle infield as well? Do you think a bag of balls and two hot chicks will get us Elvis Andrus for the next 17 years?

Jesus offseason fan speculation can get obnoxious.

biggentleben
10-12-2012, 04:26 PM
Do you think a bag of balls and two hot chicks will get us Elvis Andrus for the next 17 years?

Woah, woah, woah! TWO hot chicks?! No way we should give up the second hot chick to bring him in. Maybe a 9 and a 6 along with a bag of balls, but Andrus is nowhere near worth 2 10's. Why don't we just trade away Mauer and eat his entire contract as well while we're at it if we're going crazy talk with two 10's.

USAFChief
10-12-2012, 05:59 PM
jesus lev can get obnoxious.

ftfy.

old nurse
10-12-2012, 06:30 PM
[QUOTE=kab21;57895]


Sitting back and thinking the moon and stars are going to align in some undefined magical year far off in the future is how you become the KC Royals. You're perpetually trading the present for the future, until one day you wake up and you realize you're 20 years into a 4 year rebuilding plan with nothing to show for it, and you're farther away than you were 20 years ago.

if they can get a Josh Johnson for a reasonable price, including trading some minor league assets, AND sign him to an extension, they absolutely should do so.

Or you become the Oakland A's. Look at their roster and see the talent they aquired by trading good players frooor prospects.

You make trades like a catcher for a closer, a tantalizing prospect, and a guy you were flat out wrong on.

The Twins have to figure outt how to develop pitchers. Why would a free agent come here at this time? One would be that they were offered more here than anywhere else. Two would be they did not get an offer they like and had good numbers when pitching a Target Field so a year pitching there would get them a better paycheck. Three is no one else would sign them. Four is they believe they can carry a team to a championship and what better team than the Twins? The least likely of them all for a reason they would sign here: I lived here when I was real young so I am going to sign for a huge discount.

TheLeviathan
10-12-2012, 08:53 PM
jesus lev can get obnoxious.

ftfy.

Awww somebody didn't like their absurd suggestions being called out!

We all want better pitchers, let's start with developing them better rather than targeting questionable short-term (much less longterm) options under questionable premises.

SpiritofVodkaDave
10-12-2012, 09:25 PM
We all want better pitchers, let's start with developing them better

Well thats great and all for the 2015 and 2016 Twins...but some of us want to talk about how to improve this team for 2013 and 2014.

johnnydakota
10-13-2012, 01:51 AM
the difference between shields and baker is shields has an out pitch , and gives you 200+ innings where scotty , well not lately....did johnson ever recover his velocity he lost mid season? to me its shield ove johnson , id trade our minor leaque pitcher of the year and span for him

righty8383
10-13-2012, 02:31 AM
the difference between shields and baker is shields has an out pitch , and gives you 200+ innings where scotty , well not lately....did johnson ever recover his velocity he lost mid season? to me its shield ove johnson , id trade our minor leaque pitcher of the year and span for him

Especially considering our minor league pitcher of the year has a ceiling of a #5 starter.

TheLeviathan
10-13-2012, 06:56 AM
Well thats great and all for the 2015 and 2016 Twins...but some of us want to talk about how to improve this team for 2013 and 2014.

I don't shell out a ton of money and the prospects it will likely require in the real world (not this fantasy world the thread has devolved into) to get a guy who has a trending velocity chart like this one (http://www.fangraphs.com/pitchfxo.aspx?playerid=4567&position=P&pitch=FA) and a career ERA a run higher away from his pitcher's paradise at home. I'm all for talking about realistic options (Span for Shields is realistic with some tweaking) but the couple of posts these last few pages are just obnoxious.