PDA

View Full Version : Michael Bourn



Saul Goodman
02-05-2013, 11:55 PM
Spring training is fast approaching and our friend Michael Bourne is still unemployed. Sounds like he's looking for 5/75M. Chances are he's going to have to take a one year deal somewhere and try again for a long term contract next year.

I'd love to see the Twins way overpay for Bourne on a one year deal. 2013's first round pick is protected, so they'd only be forfeiting the number 41 or so pick. If he's having a decent year, chances they can flip him at the deadline for better prospect than that pick, especially considering that this year's draft class is down. If by some stretch of the imagination they end up competing, offer him arbitration after 2013 and recoup the pick.

Offer him 1 year 20M and see what happens.

Makes sense to me.

Edit: It would also allow Hicks to stay down in AAA til at least June, saving an arbitration year.

glunn
02-06-2013, 12:12 AM
What if he gets injured or has a bad first half? Your strategy is intriguing, but also seems fairly risky.

Saul Goodman
02-06-2013, 12:19 AM
What if he gets injured or has a bad first half? Your strategy is intriguing, but also seems fairly risky.

There's inherent risk in every single contract. They thing is, only so much can go wrong with a one year deal. The only risk is the 20-25M it would take to sign him and the second round pick. That second round pick would almost certainly be recouped the following season by offering him arbitration. Which unless, he's run over and crippled in some type of TC Bear 4-wheeler accident, he'd decline.

PseudoSABR
02-06-2013, 12:35 AM
But this risk comes with not only the price of the contract, but also that second round pick, which is worth more than straight cash. Things have to go perfectly for the team to get something better than a high* second round pick, imo.

*the supplemental round is smaller than years past, so second round picks might have more value than we are used to

old nurse
02-06-2013, 12:49 AM
Luke Bard was number 42 last year.
If Bourn is signed for the 20-25 million then traded you are essentially paying 15 million in salary to a player you don't want for the chance to maybe get a decent prospect. Why not just buy the prospect?

Top Gun
02-06-2013, 01:06 AM
If you can't afford the money on a pitcher you do need, how can you afford the money on a ofer you don't need?

Joe A. Preusser
02-06-2013, 02:14 AM
To sign Bourne, especially at the outrageous price of 20 mil! for the year comletely misses the point of this offseason. And that was to clear space on the roster to allow Bensen, Hicks, et al to prove themselves at the MLB level. Brining in an overpriced CF is the absolute last thing the Twins should do at this point.

wagwan
02-06-2013, 02:36 AM
I now. The future is ours if with old nurse. No way the Twins should give up #41 for a one year guy. Play Hicks and leave him in the outfield for ten years

Brock Beauchamp
02-06-2013, 07:38 AM
*the supplemental round is smaller than years past, so second round picks might have more value than we are used to

Second round picks have more value now. That's pretty much undeniable, as the Twins' second round pick this coming June is #41, #42, somewhere around there. That's 15-20 slots higher than was typical with the old CBA.

Gernzy
02-06-2013, 07:38 AM
I now. The future is ours if with old nurse. No way the Twins should give up #41 for a one year guy. Play Hicks and leave him in the outfield for ten years

This. Same reason we're not going after Lohse. This team will never give up a draft pick for who they think is a rental player.

spideyo
02-06-2013, 08:06 AM
Especially when this guy is a Scott Boras client.

nmoline
02-06-2013, 08:58 AM
I'd rather give him 5 year 75m. But who are we kidding, we are fans of the Minnesota Twins, they refuse to spend money on big name free agents.

Brock Beauchamp
02-06-2013, 09:08 AM
I'd rather give him 5 year 75m.

The Twins could have kept Revere and saved themselves $71m if that was the case.

snepp
02-06-2013, 09:24 AM
There are players to give those kind of years and money to, Bourn isn't one of them.

FrodaddyG
02-06-2013, 09:32 AM
There are players to give those kind of years and money to, Bourn isn't one of them.
Particularly when he plays the one position your system is truly deep in.

GCTF
02-06-2013, 10:13 AM
The Twins could have kept Revere and saved themselves $71m if that was the case.

71 million and that priceless smile.

Brock Beauchamp
02-06-2013, 10:49 AM
Particularly when he plays the one position your system is truly deep in.

There are a half dozen reasons not to sign Bourn and not a single good reason to give him a multi-year deal. He probably won't age well, the Twins need pitching more than anything, he's a Boras client, the Twins need pitching more than anything, and the Twins also happen to have no less than three good-to-excellent CF prospects (and a smattering of marginal ones) in the wings, one of which is going to be with the big league club in 2013.

Signing Bourn to a multi-year deal requires the kind of stupidity I generally reserve for the New York Mets.

70charger
02-06-2013, 11:03 AM
While I'm not really on board with bringing Bourn on board, I have to say that the original poster never said anything about a multi-year deal.

My thoughts are that a one-year deal would carry a certain amount of risk, would definitely lose us a pretty good draft pick, and isn't likely to help us more than marginally in 2013. That said, everyone has a price. I think $20 million for a year of Bourn (even if the plan is to flip him) is outrageous, and I wouldn't consider it for a second. Now, if we're talking $1 million, I think we have a deal.

Obviously neither $20 million nor $1 million is realistic, so where's the happy medium? At what max one-year salary would take the risk of injury/regression and loss of a draft pick to have the upside of protecting Aaron Hicks for a few months and the possibility of some marginal-to-good prospects at the trade deadline?

Can't say as though I know, but I'd be curious to hear what those with more information would think.

snepp
02-06-2013, 11:13 AM
I have to say that the original poster never said anything about a multi-year deal.

I have to say that no one said he did.

Willihammer
02-06-2013, 11:37 AM
A sign and trade to the Mets could be profitable, if MLB isn't willing to let them keep their 11th pick.

edit: Bourne would also allow you to hold off on starting Hicks' arb clock till June or whatever. At that point, Gibson would be nearly ready to shut down.

It might be a risk worth taking, on a 1 year deal. Trade him before the deadline for a starting pitcher to replace Gibson, and pocket the extra year of service time for Hicks and Gibson. Maybe the Mets would give us Marcum.

Pitz
02-06-2013, 11:46 AM
I had been thinking the same thing as the original poster. I definitely think that if Bourn has to settle for a 1 year deal, the Twins should strongly consider it. He would fill a glaring hole at the top of the order and actually makes the lineup look pretty potent on paper.
I'm eager to see what Hicks can do, but signing Bourn would allow them flexibility with Hicks. If he has a great spring training, or tears up AAA for a month or so than it would make sense to me to start Hicks in right and let Parmalee be the bench bat that so many have talked about needing for the punchless middle infielders. They could also find some occasions to still start Parmalee. If Hicks shows he's not ready, than he is allowed the time he needs in AAA to continue his development.
The 2nd round pick does not concern me that much. 1) I've heard this year's draft is very weak. 2) They can get the pick back the following year if they make a qualifying offer or potentially trade him to a leadoff hitter/CF starved contender for hopefully a prospect that is further along in his development than the draft pick would be.
I understand the desire to have seen that money spent on a quality SP, but it seems that ship has sailed. I feel there is very little risk in a 1-year deal for Bourn and this is definitely something worth exploring by the Twins FO.

biggentleben
02-06-2013, 11:54 AM
offer him arbitration after 2013 and recoup the pick.

The reason Bourn is available is because he was given a qualifying offer. It's the same reason Kyle Lohse is out there. The compensation system works much differently now, and this is the first offseason we're seeing the effects of it. The Twins would give up their 2nd round pick, the Braves would get a compensation pick this year if the Twins signed Bourn, but after 2013, there are estimates that the qualifying offer for free agents will be over $14M. That's significant money to assume for a guy who would be going into his age 31 season and derives the majority of his value from speed and defense.

Willihammer
02-06-2013, 12:08 PM
The other side of the coin is that guys are more appealing as rentals because they're not attached to comp picks anymore. At worst, the Twins save a year of Hicks. At best, Bourn has a great start and another team besides the Mets gets interested. Not to mention the value Bourn provides on the field. He will probably regress a bit but but still be plenty productive at age 30.

If the Twins, or another team signs Bourn to a high dollar 1 year deal, then it was worth it for Boras to decline the Braves qualifying offer. More money, same no. of year. Bourn would have to completely fall off the table for him to not decline a qualifying offer again. That is the only risk.

The Wise One
02-06-2013, 05:25 PM
The Twins could have kept Revere and saved themselves $71m if that was the case.

And have been better off with Revere over Bourne.

The Wise One
02-06-2013, 05:28 PM
Why would you worry about a year of control for Hicks when there is Buxton, Kepler and Arcia, and whater else in the pipeline.

Brock Beauchamp
02-06-2013, 07:59 PM
Why would you worry about a year of control for Hicks when there is Buxton, Kepler and Arcia, and whater else in the pipeline.

Because there's no good reason to waste a year of control of a plus prospect. It doesn't matter if there are more prospects waiting.

darin617
02-06-2013, 08:25 PM
Spring training is fast approaching and our friend Michael Bourne is still unemployed. Sounds like he's looking for 5/75M. Chances are he's going to have to take a one year deal somewhere and try again for a long term contract next year.

I'd love to see the Twins way overpay for Bourne on a one year deal. 2013's first round pick is protected, so they'd only be forfeiting the number 41 or so pick. If he's having a decent year, chances they can flip him at the deadline for better prospect than that pick, especially considering that this year's draft class is down. If by some stretch of the imagination they end up competing, offer him arbitration after 2013 and recoup the pick.

Offer him 1 year 20M and see what happens.

Makes sense to me.

Edit: It would also allow Hicks to stay down in AAA til at least June, saving an arbitration year.

I posted this topic quite a while ago and didn't get the impression that people would like this move. I would never go $20M maybe $12-15M and then flip him in June when you can trade FA's that you signed in the off season. But to pay around $5M to technically "rent" Bourne to flip for a prospect and also lose the #42 pick in the draft might be too steep of price to pay for a gamble.

darin617
02-06-2013, 08:36 PM
I'd rather give him 5 year 75m. But who are we kidding, we are fans of the Minnesota Twins, they refuse to spend money on big name free agents.

To be honest, what makes Bourn worth anything over $10M a season? He is just another CF who can hit lead off and can steal bases. Below average BA, not much power at all,and highest OBP 2011 .363

What separates him from Coco Crisp and Rajai Davis type players?

darin617
02-06-2013, 08:39 PM
The reason Bourn is available is because he was given a qualifying offer. It's the same reason Kyle Lohse is out there. The compensation system works much differently now, and this is the first offseason we're seeing the effects of it. The Twins would give up their 2nd round pick, the Braves would get a compensation pick this year if the Twins signed Bourn, but after 2013, there are estimates that the qualifying offer for free agents will be over $14M. That's significant money to assume for a guy who would be going into his age 31 season and derives the majority of his value from speed and defense.

Also, any 1YR contract he would sign would have language included that would prevent the team from making a qualifying offer so he would not be stuck in limbo next off season like this winter.

70charger
02-07-2013, 12:45 PM
Also, any 1YR contract he would sign would have language included that would prevent the team from making a qualifying offer so he would not be stuck in limbo next off season like this winter.

Can you even do that? I mean, what's to stop a current team from making a qualifying offer even if the player doesn't want it?

Besides, at the level of qualifying offer, I'm not sure many players would complain about another year. If they were in a position where even a qualifying offer was low, there will be teams out there who will be willing to take the draft pick hit to sign the player because he's that good.

The reason Lohse and Bourn are stuck in limbo is because they're not good enough to get an offer any higher than the qualifying amount and they turned down the offer from their former team. It was their choice to be picky without being good enough to back it up.

snepp
02-07-2013, 01:27 PM
Also, any 1YR contract he would sign would have language included that would prevent the team from making a qualifying offer so he would not be stuck in limbo next off season like this winter.

That kind of agreement has been specifically outlawed in the new CBA.

ashburyjohn
02-07-2013, 01:56 PM
Because there's no good reason to waste a year of control of a plus prospect. It doesn't matter if there are more prospects waiting.

Maybe a little more specifically (and not in contradiction), there is a good reason to conserve that year, because if you have a logjam you may free it via a trade, and the extra year of team control makes a young player a more valuable trade chip.

ThePuck
02-07-2013, 02:09 PM
The Twins could have kept Revere and saved themselves $71m if that was the case.

Exactly...same kind of player

FrodaddyG
02-07-2013, 02:11 PM
Maybe a little more specifically (and not in contradiction), there is a good reason to conserve that year, because if you have a logjam you may free it via a trade, and the extra year of team control makes a young player a more valuable trade chip.
Precisely. An extra year of control adds player value to the team who has him if they keep him, or to any team that may want to acquire him down the line. It's really a no-brainer to lock in the extra year with a few weeks in Rochester.

Twins Twerp
02-07-2013, 02:35 PM
The reason he hasn't signed is because of the draft pick connected. That is why no one is touching this guy. Next year you will be hoping he turns down your qualifying offer and I have a feeling he will not turn it down. For 20 million, you have to hope that he has a good season, does not get hurt, and that he doesn't accept your qualifying offer of about 14 million. No way is he worth 20 million when we probably have just as good of options in our farm system.

Willihammer
02-07-2013, 03:22 PM
No way is he worth 20 million when we probably have just as good of options in our farm system.

For 2015 maybe. I doubt we do for 2013 or maybe even 2014.

The potential for a comp pick in 2014 is the least of it, IMO.

And, as Jim Pohlad has said all offseason, the cash isn't a problem.

edavis0308
02-07-2013, 03:48 PM
If we arent going to use this theorhetical money that is being discussed to sign Bourn to a one year deal on a pitcher, then the money just plain isnt getting spent this offseason.

/thread.