PDA

View Full Version : Would You Have Gone 2 Years, $30M for Dempster?



Nick Nelson
12-13-2012, 03:46 PM
Sounds like he'll sign with Boston for around 2/26, and according to Doogie (https://twitter.com/DarrenWolfson/status/279319941247823872) the Twins didn't make an offer. Who knows if kicking in a few extra mil would've been enough to entice Dempster, but would you have made a 2/30 bid if you were Terry Ryan? Keep in mind that Morneau's expected departure takes $14M off the books for next year.

70charger
12-13-2012, 03:51 PM
Going to go out on a limb and say yes. I don't like the price tag one bit, but it seems as though that's what it takes to get a guy like that. And if he doesn't require a 3rd year, then all the better. I think he'll be effective for another couple years.

dave
12-13-2012, 03:53 PM
Sounds like he'll sign with Boston for around 2/26, and according to Doogie (https://twitter.com/DarrenWolfson/status/279319941247823872) the Twins didn't make an offer. Who knows if kicking in a few extra mil would've been enough to entice Dempster, but would you have made a 2/30 bid if you were Terry Ryan? Keep in mind that Morneau's expected departure takes $14M off the books for next year.

My guess is we've seen the extent of TR's FA pitching acquisitions. I'm as hard as the next guy on last year's staff, but I've seen enough of Dempster to persuade me he is not $26 million better than what we have. If Ryan picks up another pitcher, it more likely will come by trade. And while we keep saying Mauer can't/won't be traded and it's unlikely Morneau will be moved, keep an eye on Boston and Baltimore.

SgtSchmidt11
12-13-2012, 03:53 PM
No, but mostly because I don't really like Dempster...I'd rather have Marcum or Jackson.

Brock Beauchamp
12-13-2012, 03:55 PM
It depends.

1. You're not going to get Marcum. Then yes, I'd definitely go 2/$30m for Dempster.

2. You have a good shot at Marcum or Jackson and you're bidding competitively. Then no, I'd probably hold off on Dempster.

mike wants wins
12-13-2012, 03:57 PM
I have kind of given up at this point....still hoping to he wrong.....

Seth Stohs
12-13-2012, 04:02 PM
I'd say no because that contract would likely make him untradeable without picking up a bunch of the contract anyway.

SpiritofVodkaDave
12-13-2012, 04:04 PM
No, Dempster is old and was a disaster in the AL last year.

He will struggle to post a sub 4.50 ERA

mike wants wins
12-13-2012, 04:05 PM
So just signing him to put a competitive team on the field is a bad idea?

ashburyjohn
12-13-2012, 04:05 PM
Sounds like he'll sign with Boston for around 2/26, and according to Doogie (https://twitter.com/DarrenWolfson/status/279319941247823872) the Twins didn't make an offer. Who knows if kicking in a few extra mil would've been enough to entice Dempster, but would you have made a 2/30 bid if you were Terry Ryan? Keep in mind that Morneau's expected departure takes $14M off the books for next year.

Guh, I posed a similar question a few minutes before as a followup in a thread. I suggested $28M as a starting point to get him to give the Twins the time of day, but $30 may be more realistic. Might need a vesting option for a third year, as well, or he'd say no thanks I'll go with a contender for now. That's still better (to me) than a fully guaranteed third year for when the team has really turned the corner and he could have proved to be useless by then.

We really were fed bad information, with a presumption of 3 years, and a preference for the NL, and for Spring Training in Arizona. This actual deal blows up all three. Agents lying? When did that start?

Mr. Ed
12-13-2012, 04:07 PM
I have kind of given up at this point....still hoping to he wrong.....

Ditto.

Brock Beauchamp
12-13-2012, 04:09 PM
Might need a vesting option for a third year, as well, or he'd say no thanks I'll go with a contender for now.

Honestly, I feel the Twins are closer to competing than the Red Sox. They have a much smaller hill to climb to top the Central.

Riverbrian
12-13-2012, 04:21 PM
It depends.

1. You're not going to get Marcum. Then yes, I'd definitely go 2/$30m for Dempster.

2. You have a good shot at Marcum or Jackson and you're bidding competitively. Then no, I'd probably hold off on Dempster.

I completely agree... If Marcum and Jackson are off the board... Then Yes to Dempster because he is the best option left.

But If I'm overpaying... and I do think we should (have to) overpay over what is comfortable... I'm overpaying for Marcum or Jackson. At this point... The length of the deal or dollar amount doesn't even matter to me. We got some cash to spend and we need someone to move into our #1 Slot (even if that pitcher isn't a #1) to push everyone else down one slot.

It's not spending to spend because money is the answer... It's not... It's spending to bring in a much needed arm.

The alternative is trading Willingham plus someone like Kepler to get someone like Marcum or Jackson... or ... Inking more pitchers like Correia (which we should also do).

Honestly... This is kind of my Terry Ryan test for the off season... One Arm out of the Top Group. Just one.

The Trades were nice... Correia didn't impress or bother me... I'm still holding out hope that TR can go over the sensible number with one of the top group guys.

AND land him!!!

ashburyjohn
12-13-2012, 04:24 PM
Honestly, I feel the Twins are closer to competing than the Red Sox. They have a much smaller hill to climb to top the Central.

Depends then on whether Dempster accepts the conventional wisdom that the Red Sox are never more than a few check-signings from legitimate contention.

I'm also not that enthused about a 2013-14 Twins squad "competing" where the bar is around .500. That to me is just a fluke, although an enjoyable one, compared to the World Series-contending team that we hope is brewing ca. 2015 forward. Signing Dempster to 2 years is just a bridge to that, and I presume Dempster can infer the same as I can.

Riverbrian
12-13-2012, 04:27 PM
I also want to add for no necessary reason at all...

Dempster and Youkilis both bother me. It would seriously drive me nuts to watch the Youkilis batting stance every night with the Twins. It would also bother me to watch Dempster and that Glove Flip thing every 5 days.

I'm sorry... I'm just thinking of the kids watching at home... Ttrying to copy that ****. It just ain't good for them.

LimestoneBaggy
12-13-2012, 04:29 PM
I can't see him pitching to value under that contract. I'd pass.

rickyriolo
12-13-2012, 04:50 PM
Twins will not spend THAT MUCH for starting pitchers period.. they can sign 3 Kevin Corriea's for that kind of money.and believe me, they will

TheLeviathan
12-13-2012, 05:38 PM
I think Seth's point about trade-ability is the key. That's why this isn't attractive.

LoganJones
12-13-2012, 06:07 PM
Taken on comparative value to last year, Dempster's normalized numbers do provide quite the boost to the 2k12 numbers. Correia and Worley are already in the fold, like it or not. That's got the rotation down 50-55 runs. Poke in Dempster and that would drop an additional 30-40 Runs.

The fluctuation is weather we calculate actual innings pitched per start, averaging only one starter's numbers to fill the gap. I tried to guess who would have got those starts, but the back end of the rotation was so sad, it really doesn't mater much. The actual start thing gives the rotation a lot more innings, as we're able to throw out whole players. Not that ou can do that in reality, since things are connected, but still. We're trying calculate relative value to evaluate contract worthiness. So while the runs allowed tend to be higher, since we have to take on some of the lesser outings, the over all innings pitched by the starters goes up, because we're able to avoid all those short starts. This means that with Dempster, the rotation could have given as much as 40 extra innings last year. That's lie never having to use Maloney, Manship or Some of the longer outings for Swarzak.

There appears to be a lot of value there to Dempster, on a two year deal, of course. Hard to see that 3rd year working out. Might be even better to toss more cash at Sanchez.

gunnarthor
12-13-2012, 06:18 PM
It depends.

1. You're not going to get Marcum. Then yes, I'd definitely go 2/$30m for Dempster.

2. You have a good shot at Marcum or Jackson and you're bidding competitively. Then no, I'd probably hold off on Dempster.

Honestly, I don't see a reason you can't afford Dempster and one of Marcum/Jackson. 2/30 is high, but doable. And a heck of a lot more doable before we went 2/10 on Correia. I love Ryan but this time of the year really sucks.

Thrylos
12-13-2012, 06:26 PM
Nope. Time for the Twins to embrace the youth movement. What the Correia disaster of a signing accomplished is that at most 2 from Gibson/Hendriks/Meyer/May/Wimmers/Hermson/Whateverprospect group will be in the Twins rotation in 2013 and 2014. You don't want to make that number half of that.

ThePuck
12-13-2012, 07:15 PM
At what point do the owners say 'these salaries are out of control, enough is enough' and a strike happens?

snepp
12-13-2012, 07:33 PM
At what point do the owners say 'these salaries are out of control, enough is enough' and a strike happens?

As if the owners aren't raking in the dough as well?

mike wants wins
12-13-2012, 07:51 PM
Well, the last time the owners did that they were sued for collusion and lost. And, if you don't want to play in the market, then you should sell your team, because this is the price, Mr. Owner....

glunn
12-14-2012, 12:09 AM
I would rather pay a lot more to get someone younger, like Sanchez. The next two years are likely to be rebuilding years, and Sanchez will likely still be good when the Twins are ready to compete.

Shane Wahl
12-14-2012, 12:21 AM
It depends.

1. You're not going to get Marcum. Then yes, I'd definitely go 2/$30m for Dempster.

2. You have a good shot at Marcum or Jackson and you're bidding competitively. Then no, I'd probably hold off on Dempster.

Exactly right.